The Twelve Human Senses
20th June, 1916
Berlin
GA 169: 3 of 7
BEFORE COMING
to the topic of today's talk, I would like to say a few
words about the great and grievous loss on the physical plane we have
suffered in recent days. You will undoubtedly know what I mean: the
day before yesterday, Herr von Moltke's soul passed through the gate
of death.
[Note 1]
What this man was to his country, the
outstanding part he played in the great and fateful events of our time,
the significant, deep impulses growing out of human connections that
formed the basis of his actions and his work — to appreciate and
pay tribute to all this will be the task of others, primarily of future
historians. In our age it is impossible to give an entirely comprehensive
picture of everything that concerns our time. As I said, we will not
speak of what others and history will have to say, but I am absolutely
convinced that future historians will have very much to say about von
Moltke. However, I would like to say something that is now in my soul,
even if I have to express it at first symbolically; what I mean will be
understood only gradually. This man and his soul stand before my soul as
a symbol of the present and the immediate future, a symbol bom out of
the evolution of our time, in the true sense of the word a symbol of what
should come to pass and must come to pass.
As we have repeatedly emphasized, we are
not trying to integrate spiritual science into contemporary culture
out of somebody's arbitrary impulses, but because it is needed in these
times. There will not be a lasting future if the substance of this spiritual
science does not flow into human development. This is the point, my
dear friends, where you can see the greatness and significance we find
when we think of Herr von Moltke's soul. He participated most actively
in the busy life of our era, the life that developed out of the past
and led to the greatest crisis humanity ever had to go through in its
history. He was one of the leaders of the army and was right in the
middle of the events that inaugurated our fateful present and future.
Here was a soul, a personality, who did all this and, at the same time,
also was one of us, seeking knowledge and truth with the most holy,
fervent thirst for knowledge that ever inspired a soul in our day and
age.
That is what we should think of. For the
soul of this personality, who has just died, is more than anything else
an outstanding historical symbol. It is profoundly symbolic that he
was one of the leading figures of the outer life, which he served, and
yet found the bridge to the life of the spirit we seek in spiritual
science. We can only wish with all our soul that more and more people
in similar positions do as he has done. This is not just a personal
wish, but one bom out of the need of our times. You should feel how
significant an example this personality can be. It does not matter how
little other people speak about the spiritual side of his life; in fact,
it is best for it not to be talked about. But what von Moltke did is
a reality and the effects are what is important, not whether it is discussed.
Herr von Moltke's life can lead us to realize that he interpreted the
meaning of the signs of the times correctly. May many follow this soul
who are still distant from our spiritual science.
It is true, and we should not forget it,
that this soul has given as much to what flows and pulsates through
our spiritual science as we have been able to give him. Now souls are
entering the spiritual world bearing within them what they have received
from spiritual science. What spiritual science strives for has united
with the soul of a person, who has died after a very active life. This
then works as a deeply significant, powerful force in the realm we want
to explore with the help of our spiritual science. And the souls now
present here who understand me will never forget what I have just said
about how significant it is that souls now take what has flowed for
many years through our spiritual science into the spiritual world, where
it will become strength and power.
I am not telling you this to assuage in a
trivial way the pain we feel about our loss on the physical plane. Pain
and sorrow are justified in a case like Herr von Moltke's death. But
only when pain and sorrow are permeated by a sound understanding of
what underlies them can they become great and momentous active forces.
Take, therefore, what I have said as the expression of sorrow over the
loss the German people and all humanity have experienced on the physical
plane.
Let us stand up, my dear friends, and recite
this verse:
Spirit of your soul, ever working Guardian!
May your wings carry
Our souls' imploring love
To the son in the spheres entrusted to your care!
United with your power,
May our prayer be a shining help
To the soul it lovingly seeks.
My dear friends, as I have often said, the
occult substance that flows through our whole evolution has found its
outer expression or manifestation in all kinds of more or less occult
and symbolic brotherhoods and societies. In my recent talks I have characterized
them in more detail as really quite superficial. We are now living in
an age when the occult knowledge from the spiritual world must be given
to people in a new way, as we have been trying to do for many years
now, because the previous ways are obsolete. Granted, they will continue
to exist for a time, but they are quite obsolete, and it is important
that we understand this in the right way.
As you know, I like to call our spiritual
science anthroposophy, and a few years ago when I gave lectures here,
I called them lectures on anthroposophy. Last time, I referred to these
lectures on anthroposophy, particularly to my emphasis on the fact that
human beings actually have twelve senses. I explained that, as far as
our senses are concerned, what is spread out over our nerve substance
is organized according to the number twelve because the human being
is in this most profound sense a microcosm and mirrors the macrocosm.
In the macrocosm the sun moves through twelve
signs of the zodiac in the course of a year, and the human I lives here
on the physical plane in the twelve senses. Things are certainly rather
different out there in the macrocosm, especially in regard to their
sequence in time. The sun moves from Aries through Taurus, and so on,
and back again through Pisces to Aries as it makes its yearly course
through the twelve signs of the zodiac. Everything we have in us, even
everything we experience in our soul, is related to the outer world
through our twelve senses. These are the senses of touch, life, movement,
balance, smell, taste, sight, warmth, hearing, speech, thinking, and
the sense of the I.
Our inner life moves through this circle
of the twelve senses just as the sun moves through the circle of the
twelve signs of the zodiac. But we can take this external analogy even
further. In the course of a year, the sun has to move through all the
signs of the zodiac from Aries to Libra; it moves through the upper
signs during the day and through the lower ones at night. The sun's
passage through these lower signs is hidden from outer light. It is
the same with the life of our soul and the twelve senses. Half of the
twelve are day senses, just as half of the signs of the zodiac are day
signs; the others are night senses.
You see, our sense of touch pushes us into
the night life of our soul, so to speak, for with the sense of touch,
one of our coarser senses, we bump into the world around us. The sense
of touch is barely connected with the day life of our soul, that is,
with the really conscious life of the soul. You can see for yourself
that this is true when you consider how easily we can store the impressions
of our other senses in our memory and how difficult it is to remember
the impressions of the sense of touch. Just try it and you'll see how
difficult it is to remember, for example, the feel of a piece of fabric
you touched a few years ago. Indeed you'll find you have little need
or desire to remember it. The impression sinks down in the same way
as the light fades into twilight when the sun descends into the sign
of Libra at night, into the region of the night signs. And thus other
senses are also completely hidden from our waking, conscious soul life.
As for the sense of life, conventional psychological
studies hardly mention it at all. They usually list only five senses,
the day senses or senses of waking consciousness. But that need not
concern us further. The sense of life enables us to feel our life in
us, but only when that life has been disturbed, when it is sick, when
something causes us pain or hurts us. Then the sense of life tells us
we are hurting here or there. When we are healthy, we are not aware
of the life in us; it sinks into the depths, just as there is no light
when the sun is in the sign of Scorpio or in any other night sign.
The same applies to the sense of movement.
It allows us to perceive what is happening in us when we have set some
part of our body in motion. Conventional science is only now beginning
to pay attention to this sense of movement. It is only just beginning
to find out that the way joints impact on one another — for example,
when I bend my finger, this joint impacts on that one — tells
us about the movements our body is carrying out. We walk, but we walk
unconsciously. The sense underlying our ability to walk, namely, the
perception of our mobility, is cast into the night of consciousness.
Let us now look at the sense of balance.
We acquire this sense only gradually in life; we just don't think about
it because it also remains in the night of consciousness. Infants have
not yet acquired this sense, and therefore they can only crawl. It was
only in the last decade that science discovered the organ for the sense
of balance. I have mentioned the three canals in our ears before; they
are shaped like semicircles and are vertical to each other in the three
dimensions of space. If these canals are damaged, we get dizzy; we lose
our balance. We have the outer ears for our sense of hearing, the eyes
for the sense of sight, and for the sense of balance we have these three
semicircular canals.
Their connection with the ears and the sense
of hearing is a vestige of the kinship between sound and balance. The
canals, located in the cavity in the petrosal bone, consist of three
semicircles of tiny, very minute, bones. If they are the least bit injured,
we can no longer keep our balance. We acquire our receptivity for the
sense of balance in early childhood, but it remains submerged in the
night of consciousness; we are not conscious of this sense.
Then comes the dawn and casts its rays into
consciousness. But just think how little the other hidden senses, those
of smell and taste, actually have to do with our inner life in a higher
sense. We have to delve deeply into the life of our body to be able
to get a sense for smell. The sense of taste already brings us a growing
half-light; day begins to dawn in our consciousness. But you can still
make the same experiment I mentioned before concerning the sense of
touch, and you will find it very difficult to remember the perceptions
of the senses of smell and of taste. Only when we enter more deeply
into our unconscious with our soul does the latter consciously perceive
the sense of smell. As you may know, certain composers were especially
inspired when surrounded by a pleasant fragrance they had smelled previously
while creating music. It is not the fragrance that rises up out of memory,
but the soul processes connected with the sense of smell emerge into
consciousness.
The sense of taste, however, is for most
people almost in the light of consciousness, though not quite; it is
still partly in the night of consciousness for most of us. After all,
very few people will be satisfied with the soul impression of taste
alone. Otherwise we should be just as pleased with remembering something
that tasted good as we are when we eat it again. As you know, this is
not the case. People want to eat again what tasted good to them and
are not satisfied with just remembering it.
The sense of sight, on the other hand, is
the sense where the sun of consciousness rises, and we reach full waking
consciousness. The sun rises higher and higher. It rises to the sense
of warmth, to the sense of hearing, and from there to the sense of speech
and then reaches its zenith. The zenith of our inner life lies between
the senses of hearing and speech. Then we have the sense of thinking,
and the I sense, which is not the sense for perceiving our own I but
that of others. After all, it is an organ of perception, a sense. Our
awareness of our own I is something quite different, as I explained
in my early lectures on anthroposophy. What is important here is not
so much knowing about our own I, but meeting other people who reveal
their I to us. Perception of the other person's I, not of our own, that
is the function of the I sense.
Our soul has the same relationship to these
twelve senses as the sun does to the twelve signs of the zodiac. You
can see from this that the human being is in the truest sense of the
word a microcosm. Modern science is completely ignorant of these things;
while it does acknowledge the sense of hearing, it denies the existence
of the sense of speech although we could never understand the higher
meaning of spoken words with the sense of hearing alone. To understand,
we need the sense of speech, the sense for the meaning of what is expressed
in the words. This sense of speech must not be confused with the sense
of thinking, which in turn is not identical with the ego sense.
I would like to give you an example of how
people can go wrong in our time in this matter of the senses. Eduard
von Hartmann, who was a most sincere seeker, begins his book
Basic Psychology
with the following words as though he were stating a
self-evident truth: “Psychological phenomena are the point of
departure for psychology; indeed, for each person the starting point
has to be his or her own phenomena, for these alone are given to each
of us directly. After all, nobody can look into another's consciousness.”
[Note 2]
The opening sentence of a psychology book by one of the foremost
philosophers of our time starts by denying the existence of the senses
of speech, thinking, and the I. He knows nothing about them. Imagine,
here we have a case where absurdity and utter nonsense must be called
science just so these senses can be denied.
If we do not let this science confuse us,
we can easily see its mistakes. For this psychology claims we do not see
into the soul of another person but can only guess at it by interpreting
what that person says. In other words, we are supposed to interpret
the state of another's soul based on his or her utterances. When someone
speaks kindly to you, you are supposed to interpret it! Can this be
true? No, indeed it is not true!
The kind words spoken to us have a direct
effect on us, just as color affects our eyes directly. The love living
in the other's soul is borne into your soul on the wings of the words.
This is direct perception; there can be no question here of interpretation.
Through nonsense such as Hartmann's, science confines us within the
limits of our own personality to keep us from realizing that living
with the other people around us means living with their souls. We live
with the souls of others just as we live with colors and sounds. Anyone
who does not realize this knows absolutely nothing of our inner life.
It is very important to understand these things. Elaborate theories
are propagated nowadays, claiming that all impressions we have of other
people are only symbolic and inferred from their utterances. But there
is no truth in this.
Now picture the rising sun, the emergence
of the light, the setting sun. This is the macrocosmic picture of our
microcosmic inner life. Though it does not move in a circle, our inner
life nevertheless proceeds through the twelve signs of the zodiac of
the soul, that is, through the twelve senses. Every time we perceive
the I of someone else, we are on the day side of our soul-sun. When
we turn inward into ourselves and perceive our inner balance and our
movements, we are on the night side of our inner life.
Now you will not think it so improbable when
I tell you that in the time between death and rebirth the senses that
have sunk deeply into our soul's night side will be of special importance
for us because they will then be spiritualized. At the same time, the
senses that have risen to the day side of our inner life will sink down
deeper after death. Just as the sun rises, so does our soul rise, figuratively
speaking, between the sense of taste and the sense of sight, and in
death it sets again. When we encounter another soul between death and
a new birth, we find it inwardly united with us. We perceive that soul
not by looking at it from the outside and receiving the impression of
its I from the outside; we perceive it by uniting with it. You can read
about this in the lecture cycles, where I have described it, and also in
An Outline Of Occult Science.
[Note 3]
In the life between death and rebirth, the
sense of touch becomes completely spiritual. What is now subconscious
and belongs to the night side of our inner life, namely, the senses
of balance and movement, will then become spiritualized and play the
most important part in our life after death.
It is indeed true that we move through life
as the sun moves through the twelve signs of the zodiac. When we begin
our life here, our consciousness for the senses rises, so to speak,
at one pillar of the world and sets again at the other. We pass these
pillars when we move in the starry heavens, as it were, from the night
side to the day side. Occult and symbolic societies have always tried
to indicate this by calling the pillar of birth, which we pass on the
way into the life of the day side, Jakim.
[Note 4]
Our outer world during the life between death
and rebirth consists of the perceptions of the sense of touch spread
out over the whole universe, where we do not touch but are touched.
We feel that we are touched by spiritual beings everywhere, while in
physical life it is we who touch others. Between death and rebirth we
live within movement and feel it the same way a blood cell or a muscle
in us would feel its own movement. We perceive ourselves moving in the
macrocosm, and we feel balance and feel ourselves part of the life of
the whole. Here on earth our life is enclosed in our skin, but there
we feel ourselves part of the life of the universe, of the cosmic life,
and we feel that we give ourselves our own balance in every position.
Here, gravity and the constitution of our body give us balance, and
usually we are not aware of this. During life between death and a new
birth, however, we feel balance all the time. We have a direct experience
of the other side of our inner life.
We enter earthly life through Jakim, assured
that what is there outside in the macrocosm now lives in us, that we
are a microcosm, for the word Jakim means, “The divine poured
out over the world is in you.”
The other pillar, Boaz, is the entrance into
the spiritual world through death. What is contained in the word Boaz
is roughly this, “What I have hitherto sought within myself, namely
strength, I shall find poured out over the whole world; in it I shall
live.” But we can only understand such things when we penetrate
them by means of spiritual knowledge. In the symbolic brotherhoods,
the pillars are referred to symbolically. In our fifth post-Atlantean
epoch they will be mentioned more often to keep humanity from losing
them altogether and to help later generations to understand what has
been preserved in these words.
You see, everything in the world around us
is a reflection of what lives in the macrocosm. As our inner life is
a microcosm in the sense I have indicated, so humanity's inner life
is built up out of the macrocosm. In our time, it is very important
that we have the image of the two pillars I mentioned handed down to
us through history. These pillars each represent life one-sidedly; for
life is only to be found in the balance between the two. Jakim is not
life for it is the transition from the spiritual to the body; nor is
Boaz life for that is the transition from body to spirit. Balance is
what is essential.
And that is what people find so difficult
to understand. They always seek one side only, extremes rather than
equilibrium. Therefore two pillars are erected for our times also, and
we must pass between them if we understand our times rightly. We must
not imagine either the one pillar or the other to be a basic force for
humanity, but we must go through between the two. Indeed, we have to
grasp what is there in reality and not go through life brooding without
really thinking, as modern materialism does. If you seek the Jakim pillar
today, you will find it. The Jakim pillar exists; you will find it in
a very important man, who is no longer alive, but the pillar still exists
— it exists in Tolstoyism.
Remember that Tolstoy basically wanted to
turn all people away from the outer life and lead them to the inner.
[Note 5]
As I said when I spoke about Tolstoy in the early days of our movement,
he wanted to focus our attention exclusively on what goes on in our inner
life. He did not see the spirit working in the outer world — a
one-sided view characteristic of him, as I said in that early lecture.
One of our friends showed Tolstoy a transcript of that lecture. He
understood the first two-thirds of it, but not the last third because
reincarnation and karma were mentioned there, which he did not understand.
He represented a one-sided view, the absolute suppression of outer life.
It is painful to see him show this one-sidedness. Just think of the
tremendous contrast between Tolstoy's views, which predominate among a
considerable number of Russia's intellectuals, and what is coming from
there these days. It is one of the most awful contrasts you can imagine.
So much for one-sidedness.
The other pillar, the Boaz pillar, also finds
historical expression in our age. It too represents one-sidedness. We
find it in the exclusive search for the spiritual in the outer world.
Some years ago, this phenomenon appeared in America with the emergence
of the polar opposite to Tolstoy, namely, Keely.
[Note 6]
Keely harbored the ideal of building a motor that would not run
on steam or electricity, but on the waves we create when we make sounds,
when we speak. Just imagine that! A motor that runs on the waves we
set in motion when we speak, or indeed with our inner life in general!
Of course, this was only an ideal, and we can thank God it was just
an ideal at that time, for what would this war be like if Keely's ideal
had been realized? If it is ever realized, then we will see what the
harmony of vibrations in external motor power really means. This, then,
is the other one-sidedness, the Boaz pillar. It is between these two
pillars we must pass through.
There is much, indeed very much, contained
in symbols that have been preserved. Our age is called upon to understand
these things, to penetrate them. Someday people will perceive the contrast
between all true spirituality and what will come from the West if the
Keely motor ever becomes a reality. It will be quite a different contrast
from the one between Tolstoy's views and what is approaching from the
East. Well, we cannot say more about this.
We need to gradually deepen our understanding
of the mysteries of human evolution and to realize that what will some
day become reality in various stages has been expressed symbolically
or otherwise in human wisdom throughout millennia. Today we are only
at the stage of mere groping toward this reality. In one of our recent
talks I told you that Hermann Bahr, a man I often met with in my youth,
is seeking now — at the age of fifty-three and after having written
much — to understand Goethe. Groping his way through Goethe's
works, he admits that he is only just beginning to really understand
Goethe. At the same time, he admits that he is beginning to realize
that there is such a thing as spiritual science in addition to the physical
sciences. I have explained that Franz, the protagonist of Bahr's recently
published novel
Himmelfahrt
(“Ascension”),
represents the author's own path of development, his path through the
physical sciences.
[Note 7]
Bahr studied with the botanist Wiessner in
Vienna, then with Ostwald in the chemical laboratory in Leipzig, then
with Schmoller at the seminar for political economy in Berlin, and then
he studied psychology and psychiatry with Richet in France. Of course,
he also went to Freud in Vienna — as a man following up on all
the various scientific sensations of the day would naturally have to
do — and then he went to the theosophists in London, and so forth.
Remember, I read you the passage in question, “And so he scoured
the sciences, first botany with Wiessner, then chemistry with Ostwald,
then Schmoller's seminar, Richet's clinic, Freud in Vienna, then directly
to the theoso- phists. And so in art he went to the painters, the etchers,
and so on.”
[Note 8]
But what faith does this Franz attain, who
is really one of the urgently seeking people of the present age? Interestingly
enough, he wanders and gropes, and then something dawns on him that
is described as follows:
He was no longer in a state of spiritual
innocence. But wasn't there perhaps a kind of second innocence,
an innocence regained? Was there not a piety of the intellect, humbled
by the recognition of its own limits, wasn't there a faith for those
who know, a hope born out of despair? Weren't there throughout history
wise men, living in solitude and seclusion from the world, yet connected
with each other through secret signs, and working wonderfully and
quietly with an almost magical power in a region beyond nationalities
and creeds, in the infinite, in the sphere of a purer humanity,
a humanity nearer to God? Were there not even today, scattered all
over the world and hidden in secret, knights of the Holy Grail?
Were there not disciples of a white lodge, a lodge invisible and
perhaps not to be entered but merely felt, yet working and predominating
everywhere and determining human destiny? Hasn't there always been
an anonymous community of holy men on earth, who do not know each
other nor anything of each other and yet are working together and
on one another through the very power of their prayers? Such thoughts
had already much occupied him in his theosophical days, but he had
obviously gotten to know only false theosophists; maybe genuine,
true theosophists did not allow themselves to be known ...
These thoughts occur to Franz after he has
hurried through the world and has been everywhere, as I have told you,
and has at last returned to his home, presumably Salzburg. That's where
these thoughts occur to him, in his Salzburg home. I would like to mention
in all modesty that he did not come to us; and we can get an idea of
why Franz did not come to us. In his quest for people who are striving
for the spirit, Franz remembers an Englishman he had once met in Rome
and whom he describes as follows:
He was a clever man in his mature years,
of good family, a rich, independent bachelor, and a proper Englishman
— sober, practical, unsentimental, lacking any musical or
artistic sense; in short, a robust, cheerful, sensuous person. He
loved fishing, rowing, sailing, eating and drinking heartily, he
was a playboy disturbed in his complacency only by one single passion,
the curiosity to see everything, to get to know everything, to have
been everywhere — with no other ambition than to be able to
say with satisfaction, regardless of what place was being talked
about, that he knew this or that hotel, where Cook's had found accommodations
for him, had seen the sights, and associated with notable people
of rank and fame. To be able to travel more comfortably and to have
access everywhere, he had been advised to become a freemason. He
praised the usefulness of this association until he thought he had
discovered a similar but better organized and more powerful association
of a higher kind, which he now wanted to join by all means, just
as he would have made travel arrangements with another better firm
than Cook s if one could have been found.
He was not to be dissuaded from his conviction
that the world was governed by a small group of secret leaders,
that so-called history was made by these men who were as unknown
to their closest servants as those in turn were to theirs. He claimed
to have followed the traces of this secret world government, of
this real freemasonry of which the other was merely a most foolish
copy, made by inadequate means. He thought he had found its center
in Rome among the Monsignors, most of whom, of course, only played
a minor role as unsuspecting pawns, whose jostling provided the
cover for the four or five true leaders of the world. And, looking
back, Franz still had to laugh at the funny desperation of this
Englishman, who had the misfortune never to meet the real leaders
but always only their pawns. However, this did not deter the man
in his attempts but only served to increase his respect for this
very well-guarded and impenetrable association, which he was willing
to bet he would be allowed to enter some day — even if he
had to stay in Rome until the end of his life and become a monk
or even if he had to be circumcised.
For since he was tracking everywhere
the invisible threads of a power covering the whole world like a
spider web, he was not averse to hold Jews in very high esteem.
And occasionally he expressed his serious suspicion that in the
ultimate, innermost circle of this concealed worldwide web, Rabbis
and Monsignors might be sitting together in utmost harmony, which
would have been alright with him as long as they would allow him
to take part in their magic.
There you have a caricature of what I have
told you, namely, that there is, as it were, a kingdom within a kingdom,
a small circle whose power radiates into others. But the Englishman,
and Franz with him, imagined this circle to be a community of Rabbis
and Monsignors; as a matter of fact, they are precisely the ones who
are not in it. But you see that Franz just gropes his way here. And
why? Well, he remembers once again the eccentric whims of the Englishman:
It was only much later that it occurred
to him to wonder whether perhaps someone who had not been born with
such capacities could acquire them, whether one could train oneself
to such powers, whether they could be learned. But the theosophical
exercises soon disappointed him.
Those he had given up! You see, there is
such a groping and fumbling in our time. People like Bahr reach their
old age before they understand anything spiritual, and then they have
such grotesque ideas as we see here. This Franz is then invited to the
house of a canon. This Salzburg canon is a very mysterious personality,
and of great importance in Salzburg — the town Salzburg is not
named, but we can nevertheless recognize it. He is of even greater importance
than the cardinal, for the whole city no longer talks about the cardinal
but about the canon although there are a dozen canons there.
And so Franz gets the idea that maybe this very man is one of the white
lodge. You know how easy it is to get such ideas.
Well, Franz is invited to lunch at the canon's
house. There are many guests, and the canon is really a very tolerant
man; imagine, he is a Catholic canon, and yet he has invited a Jewish
banker together with a Jesuit, Franz, and others, including a Franciscan
monk. It is a very cheerful luncheon party. The Jesuit and the Jewish
banker are soon talking — nota bene, the banker is one to whom
practically everybody is indebted but who is really most unselfish in
what he does and as a rule does not ask for repayment of what he apparently
lends but instead only wants the pleasure of being invited to the house
of a gentleman such as the canon once a year. The eager conversation
between the Jesuit and this Jewish banker is altogether too much for
Franz. He leaves them and goes into the library to escape their scandalous
jokes, and the canon follows him.
The library, though not big, was very
select. On theology there were only the most essential works, the
Bollandist writings and a good deal of Franciscan literature, Meister
Eckhart, writings on the spiritual exercises, Catherine of Genoa,
the mysticism of Gorres and Mohler's symbolism. On philosophy there
were more books: all of Kant's works, including the collected volumes
of the Kant Society, also Deussen's Upanishads and his history of
philosophy, Vaihinger's philosophy of the As if, and very many books
on epistemology. Then the Greek and Latin classics, Shakespeare,
Calderon, Cervantes, Dante, Macchiavelli, and Balzac in the original,
but of German literature only the works of Novalis and Goethe, the
latter in various editions and his scientific writings in the Weimar
edition. Franz took down a volume of these and found a number of
marginal notes made by the canon, who at this moment left the young
monk and the Jesuit and joined Franz, saying, “Yes, no one
knows the scientific writings of Goethe.”
Now what the canon finds in Goethe's scientific
writings is characteristic, on the one hand, of what is actually contained
there and can be understood by the canon and, on the other hand, of
what the canon can understand by virtue of being a Catholic canon.
“Yes, no one knows the scientific
writings of Goethe. It is a pity! In these writings, the old heathen
that Goethe is supposed to have been suddenly appears in a different
light, and only after reading them does one understand the end of
Faust.”
There the canon is right. We cannot understand
the end of
Faust
if we don't know Goethe's scientific views.
“I have never been able to believe
that Goethe pretended there
[in Faust]
to be a Catholic
just for artistic effect. [You see, the canon in him cannot be denied,
but never mind.] After all, my respect for the poet, for all poets,
is too great to believe that at the moment he utters his last words,
he is putting on a mask.”
That is what most people believe, that Goethe
really was only pretending when he wrote the magnificent, grandiose
final scene of
Faust.
“But the scientific writings reveal
on every page how much of a Catholic Goethe was.” Yes, well, the
canon calls everything he can understand, everything he likes, Catholic.
We don't need to feel embarrassed about that.
“... how much of a Catholic Goethe
was, perhaps unknowingly and in any case without the courage of
his convictions. These writings read as though the writer, on the
whole nothing crucial, necessary, and essential is lacking, not
even the dash of superstition, magic, or whatever you want to call
it, that makes confirmed Protestants so suspicious of our sacred
doctrine. Often I could hardly believe my own eyes. But once you
are on the trail of the hidden Catholic in Goethe, you soon see
him everywhere. His trust in the Holy Spirit (of course, Goethe
prefers to call him ‘Genius’), his deep feeling for
the sacraments, which he thought were too few, his sense for penitence,
his gift for reverence, and even more so the fact that in totally
un-Protestant fashion he is not content with faith but always insists
on the acknowledgment of God in the living deed, the pious work
this rare and most difficult realization that human beings cannot
be approached by God if they do not first approach God themselves,
the realization of this awesome human freedom to choose either to
accept or reject the grace offered, this freedom through which alone
God's grace will be deserved by those who decide to accept it —
all this, even in his exaggerations and distortions, is still Catholic
to the core.”
For us, it would be particularly interesting
to know what the canon calls “exaggerations.” Well, in any
case, he calls them Catholic and goes on to say:
“Therefore, as you see, I have
often written in the margin the passages from the Council of Trent
where the same content is expressed, sometimes even in almost the
same words.”
Imagine, a Catholic canon writing the resolutions
of the Council of Trent next to the words of Goethe!
[Note 9]
In this juxtaposition you have what permeates all humanity and
what we may call the core of spiritual life common to all people. This
should not be taken as just so much empty rhetoric; instead it must
he understood as it was meant. The canon continues:
“And when Zacharias Werner tells
us that a sentence in Goethe's
Elective Affinities
has made him a Catholic, I believe him implicitly. Of course, this is
not to deny [here the canon comes through again] there is also a
heathen, a Protestant, and even an almost Jewish Goethe; I don't
want to claim him as an ideal Catholic.”
What the canon adds to this we can be pleased
to hear; well, I don't want to press my opinion on you; at least I am
pleased to hear the following:
“If Goethe had indeed been Catholic,
which on the whole he was more likely to have been than the shallow
and complacent run-of-the-mill monist the neo-German senior professors
parade under his name ...”
Of course, the canon here refers to Richard
M. Meyer, Albert Bielschowsky, Engel — neo-German senior professors
who have written neo-German works on Goethe.
[Note 10]
You see, we are already doing what our times
secretly and darkly long for, something that is indeed inevitable —
this is a very serious matter.
Now please remember some of the first lectures
I gave to our groups in these fateful times, where I spoke of a shattering
occult experience, namely the perception that the soul of Franz Ferdinand,
who was assassinated in Sarajevo, plays a special part in the spiritual
world.
[Note 11]
As most of you will
remember, I told you his soul has attained cosmic significance, as it
were. And now Bahr's novel has been published and people have been buying
it for weeks. In it the Archduke Franz Ferdinand is described by a man
who had hired himself out, under the guise of a simpleton, as a farmhand
by a Salzburg landowner who is the brother of the protagonist Franz.
Now this man disguised as a simpleton is so stubborn he has to be whipped
to work. At the time of the assassination in Sarajevo, this poor fool
behaves in such a way that he gets another thrashing; and imagine, when
he reads the news of Franz Ferdinand's assassination in an announcement
posted on the church door, this fellow says: “He had to end like
this; it could not have been otherwise!”
Well, people can't help assuming he was part
of the conspiracy even though the murder took place in Sarajevo while
the simpleton was in Salzburg. However, such discrepancies don't trouble
the people who investigate the matter: Obviously this fellow is one
of the Sarajevo conspirators. And since they find books written in Spanish
among his possessions, he is evidently a Spanish anarchist. Well, these
Spanish books are seized and taken to the district judge, or whatever
he is. He, of course, cannot read a word of Spanish but wants to get
the case off his docket as quickly as possible after the poor simpleton
has been arrested and brought before him. The district judge wants to
push this case off on the superior court in Vienna; the people there
are to figure out what to do with this Spanish anarchist. After all,
the district judge does not want to make a fool of himself; he is an
enthusiastic mountain climber and this is perhaps the last fine day
of the season, so he wants to get things settled quickly and get going!
He understands nothing of the matter. Nevertheless, he is certain of
one thing: he is dealing with a Spanish anarchist.
Then he remembers that Franz had been in
Spain (I told you Bahr himself was there too) and could read Spanish.
Franz is to read the book and summarize it for the judge. And so Franz
takes the manuscript — and what does he discover? The deepest
mysticism. Absolutely nothing to do with anarchism — only profound
mysticism! There is actually a great deal that is wonderful and beautiful
in the manuscript. Well, according to Franz this simpleton wrote it
himself because his very mysticism led him to want to die to the world.
Naturally, I do not want to defend this way of proceeding. The simpleton
then turns out to be in reality a Spanish infante, a crown prince, and
his description fits that of the Archduke Johann who had left the imperial
house of Austria to see the world. Franz could not discern the simpleton's
Austrian character, but his true identity shines through the disguise,
and Franz hits on the idea to say the fellow is a Spanish infante. You
can imagine what this means in poor old Salzburg! The people believed
they had caught an anarchist and put him into chains — now he
turns out to be a Spanish infante! But this man, who knew the heir to
the throne, Archduke Ferdinand, what does he say about the latter now
after he himself has been unmasked as an infante and a mystic?
The enchanted but now disenchanted prince,
still in his old clothes and otherwise still the same old fellow,
yet different since Franz knew the old clothes were a disguise,
said with a smile, “Forgive me this deception, which, for
my feeling, wasn't really one. I have long since stopped being the
infante Don Tadeo. If circumstances force me now to play his role
again, the part has become much more difficult for me. To myself
I was really the old simpleton, and if I ever lied at all, I lied
to myself, not to you. I could not know I would inconvenience you,
and I am sorry enough for that. Naturally it was all the silliest
misunderstanding.”
“I have known the successor to
the throne well, without having actually met him; he was very dear
to me, and we have been in touch albeit not in the ‘local’
way. [He means here in a way not on the physical plane.] He had
long overstepped the limits of his earthly work and had already
one foot in the realm of purely spiritual activity. He had to go
over completely, I knew. In order to fulfill his work he could no
longer stay here. It is only from there that his deed will be done.
I only wonder why destiny hesitated so long with him. And that Sunday,
as I came out of the church where in my prayers I had been assured
again, when I saw the anxious crowd, I knew right away he had at
last been freed. What is to happen through him, he can carry out
only from the other side. Here he could only promise it; his life
was only a preliminary announcement of what is to come. Only now
can the deed come about. I have never been able to think of him
as a constitutional monarch, with parliamentarianism and all that
other humbug. He was a man of too much stature for that. But now
he has seized the reins of action all at once. Only now in his death
will this man live, really live. This is what I felt when I heard
the news, and this is what I meant by the words I said at the time.”
“It had to end like this,” that's
what he said at the time of the assassination. I have to admit that
I was strangely and deeply moved when I read these words a few days
ago in Bahr's
Himmelfahrt.
Just compare what we find in this
novel with what has been said here out of the reality of the spiritual
world! Try to understand from this how deeply spiritual science is rooted
in reality. Try to see that those who are seeking for knowledge, albeit
at first only in a groping, tentative way, are really on the same path,
that they want to follow this path and that they also arrive at what
we are developing here, even down to the details. After all, it is hardly
likely that what I said back then could have been divulged to Hermann
Bahr by one of our members. But even if that had been the case, he did
at any rate not reject it, but accepted it.
We do not want to put into practice what
is really only some hobby or other. We want to put into practice what
is a necessity of our age and a very clear and urgent one at that. And
now certain really slanderous things are making themselves felt, and
we see that people nowadays are inclined to turn their sympathy to those
who spread slander. It is much rarer these days for people to show sympathy
for the side that is justified. Instead, precisely where injustice occurs
we find people think those who have been wronged must appease and cajole
the party who committed the injustice. We find this again and again.
Even in our Society we find it again and again. My dear friends, today
I do not feel in the mood to go into these things, and in any case that
is not the point of my talk. I never mention such things except when
it is necessary. But let me conclude by mentioning one more point.
In my recently published booklet, I have
pointed out that what we are seeking in our spiritual science has been
uniform and consistent since the beginning of our work.
[Note 12]
I have also explained that it is indeed slander to talk of any
kind of changing sides, of any contradictions to what we did in the
early days of our movement. On page 49 you will find the following:
In a lecture I gave in 1902 to the Giordano
Bruno Society, I referred to these statements by I. H. Fichte [which
seemed to me the expression of a modern intellectual movement and
not merely the opinion of an individual]; “that was when we
made a beginning with what reveals itself now as the anthroposophical
way of thinking ...”
[Note 13]
I was referring there to a lecture held in
Berlin before the German Section of the Theosophical Society was founded.
Continuing along the lines of Goethe, I wanted to create in that lecture
the starting point for this new movement not on the basis of Blavatsky
and Besant, but based on modern spiritual life, which is independent
of those two.
[Note 14]
Yet there are people today who dare to say the name
“anthroposophy” was only invented when, as they say, we
wanted to break away from the Theosophical Society. As I explained in
my book:
This shows what we had in mind was an
expansion of the modern striving for a world view to an actual observation
of spiritual reality. Our aim was not to take any old views from
the publications then (and even still today) called “theosophical,”
but to continue the striving that began with modern philosophy but
then got stuck in the abstract and therefore did not gain access
to the real spiritual world.
Circumstances sometimes bring about favorable
situations in karma. Thus, what I wrote a few weeks ago so you can now
read it no longer needs rely only on the memory of the few individuals
who heard my talk to the Giordano Bruno Society back in 1902, that is,
before the German Section was founded. Today I can present documentary
evidence. Well, life's funny like that; due to the kindness of one of
our members, Fraulein Hübbe-Schleiden, I have recently received
the letters I wrote to Dr. Hübbe-Schleiden back then, just before
and on the occasion of the founding of the German Section. Now, after
his death, those letters were returned to me.
The German Section of the Theosophical Society
was not founded until October 1902. This particular letter is dated
September 16, 1902. There are a few words in this letter I would like
to read to you. Forgive me, but I must begin somewhere. There was a
lot of talk at that time about connecting with the theosophist Franz
Hartmann, who was just then holding a kind of congress.
[Note 15]
I have no intention of saying anything against Franz Hartmann
today, but I have to read what I wrote in those days:
Friedenau-Berlin, September 16, 1902. Let
Hartmann continue to tell his rubbish to his people; in the meantime
I want to take our theosophy where I will find people of sound judgment.
Once we have a connection to the students [so far we have had only mediocre
success with this], we will have gained much. I want to build anew,
not patch up old ruins. [That is how the theosophical movement appeared
to me then.] This coming winter I hope to teach a course on elementary
theosophy in the Theosophical Library. [I did indeed hold this course,
and one of the lectures was given during the actual founding of the
German Section. The course title is mentioned here, too.] In addition,
I plan to teach elsewhere an ongoing course entitled “Anthroposophy
or the Connection between Morality, Religion, and Science.” I
also hope to be able to present a lecture to the Bruno Society on Bruno's
monism and anthroposophy. At this point, these are only plans. In my
opinion, that is how we must proceed.
That was written on September 16, 1902. Here
is the document, my dear friends, that can prove to you these things
are not simply claims made after the fact, but they have really happened
in this way. It is favorable karma that we are able to show who is right
at this moment when so much slander is spread, and will increasingly
be spread, about our cause.
|