Lecture IV
Dornach, August 14, 1920
By linking much
of what has been said lately with various outside
information, you will have gathered one thing, namely, that
our anthroposophical movement has entered a state that
expects of each individual seeking to participate in it that
he associate this participation with a profound sense of
responsibility. I have repeatedly alluded to this but it is
not always envisaged thoroughly enough. Just because we are
placed within our movement, we must not lose sight of the
terribly grave time presently faced by European civilization
and its American cousins. Even if we ourselves would say
nothing about the connection between the impulses generated
by anthroposophically oriented spiritual science and
contemporary historical events — although it is
certainly necessary to speak up — such events would
make an impact on our activities and inevitably would play a
part in them without our having a hand in the matter.
Therefore, the point is not to shut our eyes to the
importance of what is indicated by such words.
From the
interpretations put forward by Dr. Boos
[ Note 20 ]
yesterday, a number of
friends who had not realized it before may have understood
the necessary and practical connection existing between the
idea of the threefold social order and the aims of
anthroposophy.
The course of
world events presently resembles that of an unusually
complicated organism, and from all the various phenomena that
must be carefully observed, the direction being taken by this
organism becomes obvious. Much is happening today that
initially makes an insignificant appearance. These seemingly
unimportant events, however, frequently point to something
immensely incisive and drastic. Again, things go on that
clearly show the extraordinary difficulty we have in freeing
ourselves from old familiar ideas in order to rise to a
perception of what is in keeping with the times.
You can see
from a number of newspaper reports of the last few days
[ Note 21 ]
the effect made on
the world by what issues forth from Dornach, how certain
aspects of it are received by a number of persons. We should
give these matters serious consideration, recognizing that
every word we utter today must be well thought out. We should
not say important things without assuming the obligation to
inform ourselves about the course of world affairs in what is
currently a most complicated organism. At the earliest
opportunity I shall have to go into additional matters that
have a bearing here; today I only wish to introduce the
subject by saying that because of the connections of our
movement with general world affairs it is above all else our
duty to acquire a full understanding of the fact that we can
no longer indulge in any sectarianism whatever in our
movement. I have often mentioned this. The present time makes
it necessary for us to rely on each individual co-worker, but
each one bearing the full responsibility for what he
represents in reference to our movement. This responsibility
should take the form of an obligation never to say anything
that does not appear through inner reasons to have the right
relationship to the general course of contemporary world
events. Sectarian activities are least of all in harmony with
present-day world events. What is to be advocated today must
be of a nature that can be represented before the whole
world. It must be free in word and deed of any sectarian or
dilettante character. We should never allow fear to deter us
from sailing between Scylla and Charybdis.
Indicating a
certain Scylla, many people may certainly say: How am I
supposed to inform myself about what happens today when the
course of events has become so complex, when it is so
difficult to deduce the inner trends of facts from the
symptoms? However, this should not lead to the Charybdis of
doing nothing; it should induce us to steer the correct
course, namely, to make us aware of our obligation to be in
harmony with world events as far as possible, using all
available means. It is certainly easier to say: This is
anthroposophy and I am studying it; based on it, I engage in
a little thinking, researching one or the other subject which
I then represent before the world. If we wish to be active in
the way indicated above without looking left or right,
wearing blinkers in a sense in face of the great, important
events of the present, we head straight for sectarianism. We
are duty bound to study the contemporary course of events
and, above all, to base our observations on the judgment we
can acquire through the facts engendered by spiritual science
itself.
Throughout the
years, facts have been gathered together here for the purpose
of enabling each individual person to form a judgment on the
basis of these facts. They must not be left out of
consideration when, based on our observations, a person
wishes to give an opinion about something that is happening
today. I mean to refer to this only in general terms, but
plan to discuss it in greater detail at the first
opportunity.
Today I should
like to present something that will supplement what I said
last Sunday about the nature of the human sense organism.
[ Note 22 ]
I shall begin by
pointing out a certain contradiction that I have often dwelt
on before. On the one hand, without the general public
knowing much about it, but nevertheless thinking along these
lines, there exists the condition today of being infected in
a sense with the natural scientific mode of thinking. On the
other hand, we have one type of person still holding to the
old traditional belief regarding moral or religious ideals;
another has only skepticism and doubt, while for a third it
is a matter of indifference. This great contradiction
basically stirs and vibrates through all humanity today: How
is the inevitable course of natural events related to the
validity of ethical, moral and religious ideals?
I now wish to
repeat what many of you may have already heard me say.
[ Note 23 ]
On the one side, we
have the natural scientific world concept. It supposes that
by means of its facts it can determine something about the
course of the universe, in particular, that of the earth. And
although it may consider its assertions to be hypothetical,
they are imprinted into humanity's whole thinking, attitude
and feeling. Our earthly existence is traced back to a kind
of nebular condition. It is thought that everything arising
out of this nebula is brought about entirely through the
compulsion of natural laws. Again, the final condition of our
earth's existence is also viewed as being based upon
inflexible imperative laws, and concepts are formed about how
the earth will meet destruction. Scientists base this kind of
view on a widely accepted fundamental concept — even
taught to school children — that the substance of the
entire universe is indestructible, regardless of whether it
is pictured as consisting of atoms, ions or the like. It is
thought that at the beginning of earth's formation this
substance was in some way compressed, then changed and
metamorphosed, but that fundamentally the same substance is
present today that existed at the beginning of earth
evolution and that it will be present at the end, although
compressed in a different form. It is supposed that this
substance is indestructible, that everything consists only of
transformations of this substance. The concept of the so
called conservation of energy was added to this by assuming
that in the beginning there were a number of forces which are
then pictured as undergoing changes. Basically, the same sum
of forces is again imagined to exist in the final condition
of earth.
There have been
only a few brave spirits who have rebelled against ideas of
this kind. One of these I have often mentioned as a typical
example, namely, Herman Grimm,
[ Note 24 ]
who has said: People talk of
a nebulous state, of the nebulous essence of Kant-Laplace, at
the beginning of the earth's or the world's existence. From
it, it is supposed that everything on the earth, including
the human being, has been compressed through purely natural
processes. Furthermore, it is assumed that this undergoes
changes until it finally falls back into the sun as a cinder.
Now, Herman Grimm is of the opinion that a hungry dog nosing
around the bone of a carcass presents a more attractive
picture than this theory of Kant-Laplace concerning world
existence, and that from a cultural and historical point of
view people of the future will find it difficult to grasp how
it had been possible for the nineteenth and twentieth century
to have fallen victim to such pathological thinking. As I
said, a few courageous individuals have opposed these ideas.
The latter are so widespread today, however, that when
somebody like Herman Grimm rejects them, it is said of him:
Well, an art historian need not understand anything about
natural science. When someone who claims that he is
knowledgeable about natural science raises objections, he is
regarded as a fool. These ideas are taken today as
self-evident and the significance of this attitude is sensed
by very few people. For, if this conception has even the
slightest justification, all talk of moral and religious
ideals is meaningless, for according to this conception these
ideals are simply the product of human brains and rise up
like bubbles. The social-democratic theorists label these
ideals an ideology which has arisen through the
transformations of substance, and which will vanish when our
earth comes to an end. All our moral and religious concepts
are then simply delusions. For the reality postulated by the
natural scientific world-view is of a kind that leaves no
room for a moral or religious outlook, if this scientific
view of life is accepted in the way it is interpreted by the
majority of people today. The point is, therefore, that, on
the one hand, the time is ripe and, on the other, urgently
requires that a world conception be drawn from quite
different sources than those of today's education.
The only
sources that make it possible for a moral and religious world
concept to exist side by side with the natural scientific one
are those of spiritual science. But they must be sought where
they find expression in full earnestness. It is difficult for
many people nowadays to seek out these sources. They prefer
to ignore the glaring contradiction that I have once again
brought to your notice, for they do not have the courage to
assail the natural scientific world-view itself. They hear
from those they look upon as authorities that the law of the
conservation of matter and of energy
[ Note 25 ]
is irrefutable, and that
anyone who questions it is a mere dilettante. Oppressed by
the tremendous weight of this false authority, mankind lacks
the courage to turn from it to the sources of spiritual
science.
External facts
also demonstrate that the well-being of Christianity, a true
understanding of the Mystery of Golgotha, depends upon our
turning to the sources of spiritual science. The external
course of events does indeed show this. Look at the so-called
progressive theologians and what is expounded by the more
advanced representatives of Christianity. Materialism has,
after all, fastened its hold even upon religion. One can no
longer understand how the spiritual, divine principle that is
indicated by the name, Christ, is united with the human
personality of Jesus of Nazareth. For, today, it is only
through the sources of spiritual science that insight
concerning this union can be acquired.
Thus, matters
have reached the point where even theology has grown
materialistic and speaks only of “the humble man from
Nazareth,” of a man who is reputed to have taught
something more sublime than others, but in the end is only to
be considered as a great teacher. One of the most eminent
among present-day theologians, Adolf Harnack,
[ Note 26 ]
actually coined the words:
“It is the Father, not the Christ, Who belongs in the
Gospel.” In other words, the Gospel is not supposed to
speak of Christ, because theologians such as Harnack are no
longer familiar with the Christ; they know only the teacher
from Nazareth. They are still willing to accept his teaching.
The teachings concerning the Father, the Creator of the
world, belong in the Gospel, but not a teaching about Christ
Jesus himself!
Without doubt,
Christianity would continue on this path of naturalization,
of materialization, if a spiritual-scientific impulse were
not forthcoming for it. In all honesty, no conception
concerning the union of the divine and the human natures in
Christ Jesus can be derived by humanity from what has been
handed down to it by tradition. For that we require the
uncovering of new sources of spiritual science. We need this
for the religious life and also for giving the social
conditions of our civilization the new structure demanded by
current events. Above all, we need a complete reconstruction
of science, a permeation of all scientific fields with what
flows from the spiritual-scientific sources. Without this, we
cannot progress. Those who think that it is unnecessary to be
concerned with the course of the religious or the social
life, the course of public events throughout the civilized
world or the accomplishments of science; those who believe
they can present anthroposophy in sectarian seclusion to a
haphazardly thrown together group that is looked upon as a
circle of strangers by the rest of the world, are definitely
victims of a grievous delusion.
The sense of
responsibility in face of the whole trend of present events
underlies everything that I say here. It is the basis of
every sentence, of every word. I have to mention this because
it is not always understood with all seriousness. If people
today continue referring to mysticism in the same manner as
was done by many during the course of the nineteenth century,
it is no longer in harmony with what the world currently
demands. If the content of anthroposophical teaching is
merely added to what otherwise takes place in the course of
world events, this is also not in harmony with present-day
requirements. Remember how the problem, the riddle of human
freedom has been the central theme of the studies I have
conducted for decades. This enigma of human freedom must be
placed by us today in the center of each and every true
spiritual-scientific consideration.
This must be
done for two reasons. First, because all that has come down
to us from the old Mysteries, all that has been presented to
the world by the initiation knowledge of old is lacking in
any real comprehension of the riddle of human freedom.
Sublime and mighty were the traditions those mystery teachers
could pass on to posterity. There is greatness and power in
the mythological traditions of the various peoples that can
indeed be interpreted esoterically, although not in the way
it is usually done. Something grand is contained in the other
traditions that have as their source the initiation science
of ancient times, if only the latter is correctly understood.
One aspect is lacking, however; there is no reference at all
to the riddle of human freedom in the initiation science of
the ancient Mysteries, in the myths of the various peoples
— even when they are comprehended esoterically —
or in the traditions deriving from this initiation science.
For, whoever proceeds from a present-day initiation
knowledge, from an initiation of today, knows how present
initiation compares to that of the past. He knows that in the
course of its worldwide evolution mankind is only now
entering the stage of real freedom, and that formerly it was
simply not necessary to give to human beings an initiation
science impregnated completely with the riddle of freedom.
Today, hardly anybody has an inkling of what this riddle of
freedom includes, what condition the human soul finds itself
in when it becomes clearly aware of the burden it shoulders
due to this enigma. New light must be shed, after all, on all
initiation knowledge due to this riddle of human freedom. We
observe how certain secret societies carry on in direct
continuation from former times, some of them being quite
strongly involved in present-day life. They only preserve the
traditions of the past, however, only imitating and
continuing on in the sense of the old practices. These
societies are nothing more than mere shadows of the past;
indeed, they represent something that can only do harm to
mankind if it is active nowadays.
We have to
realize that if anyone today were to teach even the loftiest
former mysteries, they would be detrimental to humanity. No
one who understands the nature of present initiation can
possibly teach in a timely sense applicable to our age what
was once taught in the Egyptian, Chaldean, the Indian or even
those still so near our time, the Greek mysteries. After all,
what has been propagated up to now as doctrine concerning
Christianity has all been produced by these traditional
teachings. What is needed is that we comprehend the Mystery
of Golgotha anew based on a new teaching. This is what must
be considered on the one side.
On the other
side, we see the course of world events. We see how the
striving for the impulse of freedom rises up from
subconscious depths of the human soul; how, at the present
time, this call for freedom resounds through all human
efforts. It does indeed pervade them, but there is so much
that resounds in human striving that is not clearly
understood, that only echoes up from subconscious levels yet
to be permeated by clear comprehension. One might say that
mankind thirsts for freedom! Initiation science realizes that
it must produce an initiation knowledge that is illuminated
by the light of freedom.
And these two,
this striving of humanity and the creation of a new
initiation wisdom, illuminated by the light of freedom, must
come together. They must meet in all areas. Therefore, a
discussion of the social question must not be based on all
sorts of old premises. We can only speak of it when we view
it in the light of spiritual science, and that is what people
find so difficult. Why is that?
Mankind is
indeed striving for freedom, freedom for the individual, and
rightfully so. I emphasize: rightfully so. It is no longer
possible for human beings to cooperate with group souls in
the sense of the ancient group system. They have to develop
into individualities. This striving, however, seems to be at
variance with what is acquired by listening to initiation
science, something that must obviously originate from
individual persons in the first place. The ancient initiate
had his own ways and means of seeking out his pupils and
passing on to them the initiation wisdom, even of gaining
recognition for them, himself and his Mystery center. The
modern initiate cannot allow that, for it would necessitate
working with certain forces and impulses of the group soul
nature, something that is not permissible today. Thus,
humanity's condition today is one where everyone, proceeding
from whatever his standpoint happens to be, wishes to become
an individuality. For that reason, he naturally does not care
to listen to what comes from a human being as initiation
science. Yet, no progress can be made until it is understood
that men can become individualities only when, in turn, they
accept the content of initiation science from other
individualities. This is not only related to isolated
ideological questions. It is connected with the basic nature
of our whole age and its effects on the cultural, political
and economic spheres. Humanity is yearning for freedom, and
initiation science would like to speak of this freedom. We
have, however, only just reached the point in the stage of
mankind's evolution where sound human reasoning can grasp the
idea of freedom. Today, we must gain insight into much that
can be gathered from anthroposophical literature, and that I
should like to summarize in turn from a number of viewpoints.
It must be understood today what sort of being man is. All
the abstract chatter concerning monism misses the point of
true monism which can only be attained after one has gone
through much else, but it cannot be proclaimed from the first
as a world conception.
Man is a
twofold being. On the one side, we have what may be called
man's lower nature — the word leads to
misunderstandings, but there are few words in our language
that adequately express what one would like to convey from
the spiritual-scientific standpoint — namely, the
physical, corporeal organization of which he consists in the
first place. I have described the latter to you in my last
lecture in connection with the sense organization. Today, we
shall not go into that but refer to it again tomorrow. Those
of you, however, who have studied anthroposophical literature
to any extent at all, have some idea of man's physical,
bodily organization and know that it is connected to the
surrounding environment. What constitutes the outside world
and dwells out there in the mineral, plant and animal
kingdoms, also constitutes us human beings in the physical,
corporeal sense. In a way we are its concentration, elevated
to a higher level, and figuratively one could say that we are
the crown of creation. In the physical, bodily sense we are a
confluence of the effects of forces and substances occurring
outside and appearing before us through our sense
perceptions.
On the other
side, we have our inner life. We have our will, our feeling,
our thinking and our conceptual capability. When we reflect
upon ourselves, we can observe our own will, feeling and
thinking, and permeate these with what we call our religious,
moral and other ideals. Here, we arrive at what may be termed
the man of soul and spirit. Again, this term may easily lead
to misunderstandings, but it must be used. We cannot manage
if we do not turn the gaze of our soul on one hand to this
soul-spiritual human being, and on the other to the physical,
corporeal man. But whether we study the facts of nature
impartially or contemplate spiritual science, it is necessary
to come to the realization: This physical, bodily
organization is not really available to what human science,
currently existing in the exoteric world, is able to grasp in
any sense. If I am to clarify this schematically by means of
a sketch, I should like to say: When I condense all that
constitutes the human physical organization and its
connection with the whole surrounding world (red in sketch),
this continues to a certain point. I shall indicate that here
by a line. Despite all modern amateurish objections of
psychology, beyond this point and polarically differing from
it, we have what may be called the soul-spiritual nature of
man (yellow), that, in turn, is linked with a world of soul
and spirit. That world appears most abstract to present-day
human beings, because they grasp it only in the sense of
abstract moral or religious ideals that have also become
increasingly abstract conceptions. Yet, in regard to both
sides of human nature, we are obliged to say: What is looked
upon today as science encompasses neither man's physical body
nor his soul-spiritual nature. We cannot recognize the
physical corporeal nature of man. You can discover the
reasons for this in my little book,
Philosophy and Anthroposophy.
[ Note 27 ]
For, if man would penetrate into himself with inner vision,
that is, if he were to look into the very depths of his being
and perceive what is going on there, he would be able to do
so exactly in the sense of what modern science deems "exact."
Then, however, man could not be the being he is today, for he
would have no memory, no facility of recollection. When we
look at the world, we retain its pictures in our memory. This
means that impressions of the world reach only as far as this
barrier (see arrow in sketch). From there, they strike back
into the soul and we remember them. What thus strikes back
out of our own selves into memory conceals from us our
physical bodily nature. We cannot look into it, for if we
were able to do so all the impressions would merely be
momentary, nothing would be thrown back to form
recollections. It is only because this barrier acts as a
reflector — after all, we cannot look behind a mirror
either, its impressions are reflected back to us — that
we cannot see inside ourselves. The impressions are reflected
back to us unless we rise to spiritual science. If they were
not thrown back, we would not have the reflected impressions
of memory in ordinary life. We must be so organized as human
beings in life that we have memories. Due to this, however,
our physical bodily organization is concealed from us. Just
as we cannot see through a mirror to what lies behind it, we
cannot look behind or under the mirror of memory and behold
the way the physical body of the human being is
organized.
This is true
psychology; this is the true nature of memory. Only when
spiritual-scientific methods penetrate through this reflector
in such a way that no use is made of the faculty of memory
— as I have already mentioned in public lectures
— and, instead, without recollection, one works each
time with new impressions, only then are the true forms of
body and soul discovered.
It is the same
in the other direction. If, with our ordinary powers of
cognition, we could penetrate the soul-spiritual concerning
which I told you last Sunday that this is what is in truth
located behind the world of the senses rather than atoms and
molecules — and if we were not prevented, so to speak,
by the boundaries and barriers of natural science, there
would not be present in us something that is, in turn, needed
in human life and must be developed by us between birth and
death, namely, the capacity for love. The human capacity for
love is created in us by the fact that, in this life between
birth and death, if we do not advance to spiritual science,
we have to forego penetrating the veil of the senses and
seeing into the spiritual world. We retain the capacity of
memory only by renouncing all ability to see into our own
physical body. Thereby, however, we are exposed to two great
illusions. The dogmatic adherents of the natural scientific
world conception are at the mercy of one of these illusions.
They pay no attention to initiation knowledge and do not come
to the realization — in the way I described it to you
last Sunday
[ Note 28 ]
— that behind the veil of the senses there is no
matter, no substance, no energy, of which natural science
speaks, but soul-spiritual being through and through. Today,
I must still reiterate with the same emphasis what I stressed
in my commentary on the third volume of Goethe's scientific
writings, namely, Goethe's
Theory of Color.
[ Note 29 ]
Out there is the
world's carpet of colors, the red, blue and green; out there
are the other perceptions. No atoms and molecules are
concealed behind it all, but spiritual beings. What is driven
to the surface from these spiritual beings lives and
expresses itself in the world's carpet of colors, in its
relationships of sound and warmth and all the other
sensations the world transmits to us.
Those, however,
who are dogmatic followers of the natural scientific world
view today do not realize this. They have no desire to listen
to initiation science. In consequence, they begin to
speculate about what is hidden behind color, warmth, and so
forth, and arrive at a material construction of the world.
However well founded this construction may seem for example,
the modern theory of ions — it is always the result of
speculation. We must not speculate about what is behind the
world of the senses; we may only gain experiences there by
means of a higher spiritual world. Otherwise, we must content
ourselves to remain within the phenomena. The sense world is
a sum of phenomena and must be comprehended as such.
Thus, we are
given a picture of nature today which is then extended to
include the state of the earth at its beginning and at its
end — a picture that excludes an ethical and religious
world view for the honest thinker.
The victims of
the second illusion are those who Look within. For the most
part, they do not go beyond what is reflected. Ordinary man
in everyday life perceives the effects of memory — he
recalls what he experienced yesterday and the day before,
indeed, years ago. Someone who becomes a mystic today brings
any number of things to the surface from within which he then
clothes in beautiful mystical words and theories. But as I
have recently pointed out,
[ Note 30 ]
these things are but the bubbling and seething of
his inner organic life. For, if we penetrate this mirror, we
do not come to what a Master Eckhart or Johannes Tauler have
in their mysticism. We arrive at organic processes of which,
it is true, the world today has scarcely any idea. What is
clothed in such beautiful words is related to these organic
processes as the flame of a candle is related to the
flammable material — it is the product of these organic
processes. The mysticism of a John of the Cross, of a
Mechthild of Magdeburg, or of Johannes Tauler and Master Eckhart
[ Note 31 ]
is beautiful, but nevertheless, it is only what boils up out of
the organic life and is described in abstract forms merely
because one lacks the insight into how this organic life is
active. He can be no true spiritual scientist who interprets
as mysticism the inwardly surging organic life. Certainly,
beautiful words are used to describe it, but we must be
capable of taking a completely different viewpoint from that
of the ordinary world when referring to these matters. We
ought not to adopt the humanly arrogant standpoint and say:
The inner organic life is the lower form of life. It is not
elevated if its effects are designated as mysticism. On the
contrary, we are impelled into the life of the spirit when we
discern this organic life and its effects and realize that
the more we descend into man's individual nature, the more we
distance ourselves from the spiritual. We do not approach it
more closely. We draw near the spirit only by way of
spiritual science, not by descending into ourselves. When we
do the latter, it is our task to discover how the
collaboration of heart, liver and kidneys produces mysticism;
for that is what it does.
I have often
pointed out that the tragedy of modern materialism is that it
actually cannot perceive the material effects, indeed, that
it cannot even reach as far as the material effects. Today we
have neither a true natural science nor a genuine psychology.
True natural science leads to the spirit, and the kind of
psychology progressing in the direction that we have in mind
today leads to insight into heart, liver and kidneys, not the
abstractions our modern, amateurish psychology speaks of. For
what is frequently called thinking, feeling and willing today
is an abstract set of words. People lack insight into the
concrete aspects, and it is easy to accuse even sincere
spiritual science of materialism just because it leads into
the nature of material elements in order to guide us in this
way to the spirit.
It will be the
specific task of true spiritualism to unveil the nature of
all matter. Then it will be able to show how spirit is
effective in matter. It must be taken quite seriously that
spiritual science ought not to be concerned with the mere
logicality of knowledge, but has to aim for a knowledge that
is action. Something must be done — with regard to
knowing. What is taking place in the process of cognizing
must become involved in the course of world events. It must
be something factual. It was just this that I was trying to
indicate last Sunday and the days before. It is a matter of
arriving at the realization that spirit as such must be
comprehended as a fact; no theory concerning the spirit may
be developed. Theories should only serve to lead to living
experience of the spirit. This is the reason why it is so
often necessary for the true spiritual scientist to speak
paradoxically. We cannot persist today in talking in the
customary formulations when we speak about spiritual science;
otherwise, we come to what an erroneous theosophy has led to.
It mentions any number of the members of man's being —
the physical man, the etheric and astral being — each
one more tenuous than the last. Physical man is dense, the
etheric is less so, the astral being is still more rarefied.
There are utterly tenuous mental and other states that are
increasingly delicate, a perceptible mist, but all remain a
mist, they all remain matter! That, however, is not the
point. What does matter is that one learns in substance
itself to overcome material. This is why one must frequently
employ words that have a different connotation from the one
customary in everyday life.
Therefore, we
must say — and that matter will become clearer to us
tomorrow: Take, on the one side, a person who is of a
thoroughly materialistic mind and has been led astray, shall
we say, by present-day materialism, one who cannot raise
himself to a view of anything spiritual and, according to
theory, is a complete materialist, considering any mention of
the spirit pure nonsense. Suppose, however, that what he says
concerning matter is intelligent and really to the point.
This man, then, would have spirit. Although, by means of his
spirit, he might uphold materialism, he would have
spirit.
Then, let us
look at another person who is a member of a theosophical
society and adheres to the viewpoint: This is the physical
body, then comes the more rarefied etheric body, followed by
a more tenuous astral body, mental body, and so on. It does
not take much spirit to make these assertions. Indeed, such a
theory can be represented with very little spirit. The
expounding of such a spiritual world is then, strictly
speaking, a falsehood, because in reality one only pictures a
material world phrased in spiritual terms.
Where would a
person look who is genuinely seeking for the spirit? Will he
seek it by turning to the materialistic theorist who has
spirit, albeit in a logical manner, or will he turn to the
one who makes plausible statements, so to say, but whose
words refer only to matter? The true spiritualist will speak
of the spirit in connection with the former, the one who
represents a materialistic world conception, for there spirit
can be present, whereas no spirit need be present in
expounding a spiritual view. What is important is that spirit
is at work, not that one speaks of spirit.
I wished to say
this today merely to clear up certain matters that seem
paradoxical. The spirited materialist may be more filled with
spirit than the exponent of a spiritual theory who presents
it spiritlessly. In the case of true spiritual science, the
possibility no longer exists merely to dispute logically
about ideological standpoints. It becomes imperative to grasp
the spirit in its actuality. That is impossible unless one
first comprehends some preliminary concepts such as those of
which we have spoken today and shall be considering further
tomorrow.
|