IV
THE DISCUSSION
yesterday was certainly of absorbing interest, but I
must enter a caveat in connection with a question that has just been
handed to me. I must again — as on a previous occasion — emphasise
that we shall only reach an adequate method of ascertaining the
relationship between individual remedies and individual phenomena of
disease, after having answered in these lectures certain preliminary
questions.
Only these can enable us to judge the significance of every fact we
discover about the connection between man and that external nature
from which our remedies are derived. In particular, until we have
settled these preliminaries, we shall not find it possible to deal
with the connection between specific remedies and specific organs, for
the simple reason that the connection is a complicated one, and we can
only appreciate its real point when we have answered certain
preliminary questions. This we shall try to do today and perhaps also
in part tomorrow. Then we shall be in a position to point out a
definite connection between particular remedies and the disease of
particular organs.
I want to make an introductory remark today and at once; and to ask
you to accept it provisionally, because it throws light on many
things.
Regarding what was said in yesterday's lecture,
[Ed: A lecture on the Ritter treatment of disease given
by one of those attending the course.]
I should like to ask
you to face the reverse side of the matter. In that lecture, many very
instructive cases were cited of undoubted cures — and certainly we
must feel deeply gratified at this result. But I can suggest a very
simple means whereby these cures would become more and more
infrequent, and of course, I only make this suggestion so that you do
not use this means although one might be led to use it. And I can, of
course, only mention this amongst persons who have acquired a certain
knowledge of Anthroposophy.
The method referred to would consist in making every possible effort
to make the Ritter therapy universally accepted. In face of successes
of this treatment, you forget that you work as individual physicians.
Possibly individuals among you may be aware of the struggle you have
to wage against the majority of other doctors; and you may be aware
that the moment you make Ritter's treatment into an accepted
university institution, you would cease to be a minority in opposition
and that treatment would then be practised by many others — I will
not go so far as to say by all. You would then find the number of your
successful cures appreciably diminished.
So strangely do things befall in real life; they are often quite
different from what we have imagined.
As individual medical men you have the greatest interest in healing
the individual patient, and modern materialistic medicine has even —
one might say — sought in this way a legal justification for its aim
of healing the individual. But this justification really consists in
the claim that there are no diseases; there are only sick, diseased
people! Now, this justification would be valid if patients were really
so isolated regarding their sickness, as appears to be the case today.
But in actual fact, individual patients are not so isolated. The fact
that certain dispositions of disease spread over a wide region, as was
mentioned yesterday by Dr. E., is of great importance. After curing one
case, you can never be sure of the number of other individuals to whom
you have brought the disease. The single case of disease is not viewed
as part of a general process, and therefore, taken one by one, the
individual result may be most striking.
But one who aims at the benefit of mankind as a whole must speak — if
I may say so — from a different angle. This is the factor which
requires not only a one-sided purely therapeutic orientation, but a
completely worked out therapy on the basis of pathology. This is
precisely what we here attempt to provide, bringing a certain
rationale into what is otherwise merely an empirical thinking on a
basis of statistics.
We will start our inquiry today from a fact that is common knowledge,
and can fundamentally help us to judge the relationship of man to
external nature, but has not been given anything like due attention,
in ordinary medical and biological thinking.
This is that man as a threefold being, in his nerves and senses
system, in his circulatory system (as a being living in rhythms) and
finally in his metabolic system, has a certain negative relationship
to the events of external nature, especially in the plant world.
Please give your consideration to this: in external nature (let us
consider only plants to begin with) there is in the flora a tendency
at work to concentrate carbon; to make this substance the base of all
vegetation. Inasmuch as we are surrounded with plants, we are
surrounded with organic structures whose essential nature consists of
carbon concentration. Do not forget that the same substance is also
present in the human organism, but that it is essential to the
organism to arrest this formation, to keep it, as it were, in a
permanent status nascendi, of dissolution, and to replace it by the
opposite substance.
We have the initial stages of this process in what I have recently
termed the lower human organism. We deposit the carbon and, begin, as
it were, out of our own forces, the process of plant formation, and at
the same time, we are compelled to fight against this process, at the
urge of our upper organism. We cancel the plant formation by opposing
carbon with oxygen, by changing it into carbon dioxide, and thus we
develop in ourselves the process directly opposite to plant formation.
I recommend you to give heed wherever these processes contrary to
external nature are found. You will thereby reach a more fundamental
comprehension of what man actually is. You do not understand man's
nature by weighing him — to take a symbolic example for all
investigations by means of the methods proper to physics; but you will
understand something about the mechanics of man immediately if you
consider that the brain, as is well known, has an average weight of
about 1,300 grammes, but that this full weight cannot press upon the
lower interior surface of the cranium, for if it did, all the delicate
network of minute veins in that region would be crushed and
obliterated. The pressure of the brain on its base does not exceed
twenty grammes. The cause is the well known hydraulic principle
enunciated by Archimedes, that the brain becomes buoyant as it floats
in the cerebro-spinal fluid, so that its total mass and weight are not
effective but are counteracted by the surrounding liquid. And just as
the weight of the brain is neutralised and we do not live within the
physical weight of our organism, but within the buoyancy which is the
force opposed to material weight — so is it with other human
processes. In fact we do not live in what physics would make of us,
but in that part of the physical that is neutralised or counteracted
in us. And similarly we do not live in the processes observable as
operative in external nature, which reach their final manifestations
in the vegetable world, but we live in the cancelation of the plant
formation process. This fact is of course an essential in building the
bridge between the human organism in disease and remedies drawn from
the vegetable world.
This theme could be treated — so to speak — in the style of a
poetical story. We could say: if we take in all the beauty of the
vegetable world that surrounds us in external nature, we are entranced
and rightly so. But it is otherwise if we cut open a sheep's body and
forthwith become aware of another kind of flora which certainly
originated in a similar way to the flora of the external world.
If we open the body of a freshly killed sheep and encounter the full
force of the odour of putrefaction from its entrails, we most
certainly feel far less pleasure in the existence of the intestinal
flora. We must carefully note and consider this fact; for it is simply
self-evident that the same causes which favour the growth of
vegetation in external nature, must be counteracted in man, and that
the intestinal flora ought not to develop in us. Here we have a
remarkably extensive field of research, and I would venture to
recommend, as a theme for doctoral theses for younger students, to
make use of this subject matter, and especially of comparative
anatomical research, on the intestinal structures of various animal
groups, through mammals up to man. As I say, a remarkably rich source,
for much that is most significant here has not yet been investigated.
Try particularly to find out why the opened sheep exhales so foul an
odour of putrefacation by reason of its intestinal flora, whereas this
is far from being the case in birds, even in carrion birds, whose
bodies when opened smell comparatively pleasant. There is very much in
these matters that has received no scientific study and research up
till now. And the same is true of the comparative anatomy of the
intestines. Think for a moment of the considerable difference in all
birds from both the Mammalia and mankind. (It is just here that
materialists, for instance the Paris expert, Metchnikoff, have
perpetrated the greatest errors). In birds there is a remarkably poor
development of both bladder and large intestine. Only in those groups
which form the Ratites (the Ostrich and its relatives) does the colon
begin to enlarge, and certain approximations to the bladder appear. So
that we are led to the important fact that birds are unable to
accumulate their excretions, retain them for a while within their
bodies and then evacuate them as occasion offers; but on the contrary,
there is a continuous equipoise between what is taken into their bodies
and what is evacuated from them.
It is one of the most superficial views to regard the flora of the
human intestines — and, as we shall see later, also the microscopic
fauna found there and elsewhere in the human organism — as anything
to be called the cause of sickness. It is really quite appalling, in
the course of examining and collating the literature pathology today,
to find in every chapter the refrain: In cases of this disease we have
discovered such and such a bacillus, in cases of that disease, another
bacillus and so forth. Such facts are of great interest to the study
of the botany and zoology of the human organisms, but as regards the
condition of disease they have at best only the significance of
indicators, indicators enabling one to conclude that if this or that
form of disease is present, the human organism thus affected offers
appropriate soil for the growth of this or that interesting vegetable
or animal micro-organism. They mean this and nothing more.
With the disease as such, this development of microscopic flora and
fauna has only very little to do; and that little, only indirectly.
For, I ask you to observe that the logic displayed in contemporary
medicine today on these themes, is quite remarkable. Suppose for
example you discover a landscape, in which you find a number of
extremely well fed and healthy looking cattle. Would it occur to you
to say: all that you behold in this countryside is as it is, because
the cattle have somehow descended from the air and have infected the
district? Such an idea would hardly occur to you; rather will you be
obliged to inquire, why there are industrious people in this district,
why the soil is specially propitious for this or that form of
pasturage, and so on. You will probably exhaust all the possible
reasons for well-fed and cared for livestock, in your mental review;
but you would never dream of propounding the theory that the
countryside has been infected by an immigration of well fed cows! This
however is exactly the train of reasoning displayed by Medical Science
today, in respect of microbes, etc....
These remarkable creatures simply prove, by their presence, that there
is a certain type of medium or substratum favourable to them, and
attention should accordingly be directed to the study of this
substratum. Of this substratum, of course there may be indirect causes
and effects. For instance, in the country-side we spoke of, someone
might say; “Here are a lot of fine, well-cared for cattle; if we send
a few more, perhaps some more people will put their backs into it and
join the others.” Thus it is, of course, possible, that a well
prepared substratum is incited by the invasion of bacteria to develop
some disease on its own part. But with the study of disease as such
this concentration on the nature of bacilli has nothing whatever to
do. If only care were taken to build up a sound logical line of
thought, nothing of what is perpetrated by official science to the
ruin of sound thinking, could occur.
The really decisive factor is a certain unbalanced interaction of what
I have recently termed the upper and lower spheres in man, which may
disturb or destroy their correct and normal relationship. So that a
defective counter-activity of the upper sphere may set free in the
lower sphere forces which cannot cope with the process of plant
formation; a process which is there as an inborn tendency and requires
to be checked. Then there is opportunity for the growth of abundant
intestinal flora, and such intestinal flora becomes a symptom of
defective abdominal functions in man.
Now there is this peculiarity: the activities which normally proceed
from the upper sphere to the lower, are dammed up, as it were, if they
cannot fulfill their downward course. Therefore, if there are obstacles
which prevent the performance of the functions for which the lower
part of the body is organised, those functions are pushed backwards.
That may seem to some people an unscientific expression, but it is
more scientifically accurate than much that is written in the usual
text books on Pathology. These processes, normally proper to the lower
sphere of man, are pushed back into the upper, and we have to observe
and follow this up as a cause of discharges from the lungs and other
parts of the upper body, such as the pleura and so on, and inquire
into the state of the normal or abnormal secretory processes of the
lower sphere of man It is very important to get a clear view of this
reversal of organic processes from and through the lower sphere into
the upper again, so that much that manifests in the upper parts are
simply abdominal processes pushed back. And this reversal of processes
does occur if the correct interaction between the two spheres is
disturbed.
Here is another circumstance for your consideration. You all know it
as a fact; but it has not received adequate attention, although a
healthy scientific view would lay great stress on it. At the very
moment that you have thoughts about any organ of your bodies, or to
express it better, thoughts that are connected with any organ, there
is a certain degree of activity in that part. Here is, I suggest to
you another wide field for future doctoral theses! Just study the
association of certain trains of thought with, for example, the flow
of saliva, the flow of mucoid substance from the intestines, the flow
of milk, of urine, of seminal secretion; all these are the
accompaniment of thoughts which arise and proceed concurrently with
these organic phenomena.
What is the fact before us? In your soul life certain thoughts arise;
organic phenomena appear concurrently; the two processes run parallel.
What does it mean? What arises in your thoughts is entirely within the
organs. If you have thoughts synchronising with a glandular secretion,
you have drawn the activity which is the basis of the thought, the
thinking out of the gland itself. You perform the activity apart from
the gland, leaving the gland to its own fate, and the gland performs
its proper activity; it secretes. The secretion is held up, that is to
say what otherwise is set free from the gland, remains within it,
because thought unites it with the gland. Here then, you have so to
speak, in a tangible form, the passing of plastic activity from out of
the organ into the thought. You can say to yourselves: if I had not
thought thus, my gland would not have secreted. That is: I have drawn
a force out of the gland, transferred it into my soul life, and the
gland has given forth its secretion.
The human organism supplies the most obvious proof of my argument in
our previous considerations, that what we experience in soul and
spirit is simply the operation of those formative forces, separated in
us, but working in the rest of Nature's order. The external natural
processes take place, by virtue of the same forces that develop the
flora of fields and woods, corresponding to our intestinal flora; in
the external flora are the same formative forces that we extract in
the case of our own flora. If you look at the flora of the mountains
and meadows, you must recognise in them the same forces that you
evolve in your thoughts, when you live in representation and feeling.
And the humble vegetation of your intestines differs from the external
flora, because the latter do not have to be deprived of the thoughts.
Thoughts are inherent in the external vegetable world, as much parts
of the plants as their stems and leaves and blossoms.
Here you get an idea of the kinship between what holds sway in flowers
and foliage and that which works within yourselves when you develop an
intestinal vegetation, which you deprive of formative powers, taking
those powers away for your own use. For indeed, if you did not do this
you would not be a thinking being. You take away from your intestinal
flora what the flora out in nature still retain.
This is equally true of the fauna. It is impossible to correlate the
nature of man with remedies from the vegetable world, without
understanding what I have just said. Similarly until we realise that
mankind has drawn away from his intestinal fauna the forces formative
of animal life in external nature, we can get no right concept of the
use of sera.
So you can see that a system, a rationale in these matters, is only
obtainable when we envisage the relationship of man to his
environment. And I would draw your attention to another point that is
curiously significant. I do not know how many of you some time ago
noticed the most preposterous placards forbidding people to spit. As
you know the purpose behind them was to combat tuberculosis. These
prohibitory placards are abjured for the reason — which ought to be
common knowledge — that the daily diffused light of the sun destroys
the bacilli of tuberculosis in a very short time. If you examine a
sputum specimen after a short time, it contains no more such bacilli.
So that even if the assumption of current medicine were valid — this
prohibition would be extremely absurd. Such prohibitions have
significance for the elementary observance of cleanliness, but not for
the widest aspects of hygiene.
For the student who is beginning to estimate facts correctly, this is
very important, for it indicates the inability of the kinsman of
intestinal fauna or flora, the bacillus, to survive in the sunlight.
Sunlight does not suit it. Where can the bacillus survive? In the
interior of the human body. And why just there? It is not that the
bacillus itself is the noxious agent, it is the forces active within
the body that we must consider. And here is another fact that is
ignored. We are continually surrounded by light; light — as you will
of course remember perfectly from your study of science — has supreme
importance for the evolution of the extra-human beings, and especially
for the development of all extra-human flora. But at the border line
between ourselves and the world outside, something very significant
happens to light, that is, to something purely etheric; it becomes
transmuted. And it needs must be transmuted. For, consider how the
process of plant formation is held up in man, how this process is so
to speak broken off and counteracted by the process that manufactures
carbon dioxide. In the same way, the process contained in the life of
light is interrupted in man. And so, if we seek for light within man,
it must be something transformed, it must be a metamorphosis of light.
At the moment of crossing the border of man inwards we have a
metamorphosis of light. This means that man does not only transform
the common, ponderable processes of external nature within himself,
but also the imponderable element — Light itself. He changes it into
something different. And if the bacillus of tuberculosis thrives in
the human interior and perishes in the full sunlight, it is evident —
to a sound judgment of the fact — that the product of the light as
transmuted within us, must offer a favourable environment to these
bacilli, and if they multiply excessively, there must be something
wrong with the product of transmutation, and thence we get the insight
that amongst the causes of tuberculosis is involved that of the
process of transmutation of light within the patient. Something occurs
which should not occur, otherwise he would not harbour too many of the
tuberculosis bacilli — for they are always present in all of us, but
as a rule in insufficient numbers to provoke active tuberculosis. If
they are too prolific, their “host” succumbs to the disease. And the
tuberculosis bacillus could not be found everywhere, if there were not
something abnormal in the development of this transmuted light of the
sun.
It will again be easy to work out an adequate number of doctorial
theses and scientific papers on this. Empirical material gleaned from
observation, will pour on you in floods, in corroboration of views
which I can only offer here in mere outline.
What happens if a human being becomes suitable soil for tuberculosis
bacilli is that either he is not constitutionally capable of absorbing
sunlight, or he does not get enough sunlight owing to his way of life.
Thus there is not an adequate balance between the amount of sunlight
he receives from outside, and the amount he can transmute; and this
forces him to draw reserves from the already transmuted light stored
up within him.
Please pay particular attention to this: Man by the very fact of being
man, has a continuous supply of stored and transmuted light within.
That is necessary to his organisation. If the mutual process, enacted
between man and the external sunlight, does not take place properly,
his body is deprived of the transmuted light, just as, in cases of
emaciation, the body loses fat which it needs. And in such cases, man
faces the dilemma of either forcing his upper sphere to become
diseased or of depriving his lower sphere of what he needs for the
upper: that is of making his lower sphere sick, by depriving it of
transmuted light.
You will gather from this that the organisation of man needs not only
ponderable substances, derived from the external world and
transformed, but that imponderable, etheric substances are also
present within him, although in metamorphosis. Further you will
conclude that these basic principles afford the possibility of
building up a correct view, on the one hand, of the healing effect of
the sun's light: we can expose the human being directly to the
sunlight, in order to regulate his disordered interrelation to the
environing light. And, on the other hand, we may administer internally
those substances that counteract the irregularity in the deprivation
of transmuted light. We must counter-balance the deprivation of
transmuted light, by means of what can be drawn from the remedial
substances. There is the window through which you can observe the
human organisation at work.
But now — you must excuse my somewhat undiplomatic expression, it is
really objective, detached from sympathy or antipathy — everybody who
observes the world must after a time acquire a certain anger against
every use of the microscope, against every research on the microscopic
scale: because microscopical methods are more apt to lead away from a
wholesome view of life and its disturbances, than to lead towards it.
All the processes actually affecting us, in our health and sickness,
can be much better studied on the macroscopic than on the microscopic
scale. We must only seek out the opportunities for such a study in the
world of the macrocosm.
Let us return to the Birds. As a result of the absence of a bladder
and large intestine, these creatures possess a continual balance
between nutrition and evacuation. Birds can evacuate their waste
matter in flight; they do not retain it; they do not store it in
themselves. They have no organs for such a purpose. If a bird were to
accumulate and retain excretions, this would be a disease which would
destroy it. In so far as we are human beings we have gone further than
the birds on the evolutionary path, in the phrase that meets
contemporary opinion; or — as would be a more correct statement — we
have descended below the level of that order. For birds do not need to
wage the vigorous war against intestinal flora which does not exist in
them; this war is unavoidable in higher animals and mankind.
But let us consider a — shall we say — somewhat more highly placed
activity of ours; the metamorphic activity of the etheric element, the
metamorphosis of light, as just described. In respect of these
functions we are on the same grade as birds. We have a large intestine
and a bladder in our physical organism, but in our etheric organism,
in these respects, we are birds; these organs are actually absent in
the dynamics of the cosmos. Therefore we are obliged to work up light
as soon as we receive it, and to give forth the products by excretion.
If a disturbance arises here, there is no corresponding organ for its
operation. We cannot stand the disturbance without our health
suffering accordingly. So when we observe the birds with their
miniature brains, it becomes evident that in the macrocosmos they are
replicas of our more subtle organisation. And if you want to study man
with reference to this finer organisation which separates itself from
his coarser organisation which has descended below the birds — then,
my friends, you must study the processes of the world of birds
macroscopically.
Here I should like to interpolate a comment. We human creatures would
be in a sad state, if in our etheric organism we had the same
superiority over birds as we have in our physical; for the etheric
organism cannot be enclosed and sequestrated, in the same way, from
the external world. If we possessed organs of smell receptive to the
storage of transmuted light, the social life of mankind would be an
appalling experience. We should have the same experience we get when
we cut open a sheep and inhale the fumes of its entrails. Whereas, in
actual fact, the etheric aroma of mankind, as perceived among
ourselves, may be compared to the relatively far from disagreeable
smell of a freshly killed carrion bird. Contrast this with what we smell
if we open the body of a ruminant animal and even of such an animal as
the horse, which is not a true ruminant although it has the tendency
to become a ruminant in its organisation.
So what we have to do is to investigate the analogy between what
happens in the external animal and vegetable worlds, and what happens
in regard to the intestinal flora and fauna in the human organisation,
which has to be combated and counteracted. And in deciding the
relationship between any specific organ and any specific remedy, we
must pass from the general definitions just given, to the particular
definitions and descriptions of the following lectures.
Now pass from the reasons compelling us to combat the intestinal flora
and fauna, inasmuch as within the circulatory function we find
something that attacks the process of plant formation. Let us consider
man's nervous and senses system. This aspect of our nature is far more
significant for its totality than is generally believed. Science has
become so remote an abstraction, that it has not been realised how
this nervous and sensory system, which is interpenetrated with light
and the warmth inseparable from light, is linked up with the internal
life. This is because the imponderable elements that enter the body
with the light, must be absorbed and transmuted by our organs, and are
forming organs in us, just as do the substances of the ponderable
world. The special significance of the nerves and senses system for
our human organism has been neglected.
But whereas, if we enter more deeply into the lower man we descend out
of the formative force of intestinal flora into that of intestinal
fauna, we come, if we ascend in man, out of the region where the
intestinal flora is combated, into the region where there must be a
continual combating of the tendency of man to become mineralised, to
become sclerotic. You can observe externally in the greater
ossification of the human head how the tendency towards mineralisation
increases the more man develops upwards.
This tendency towards mineralisation is of great importance for our
whole organisation. We must constantly recall — as I have done
already in public lectures — that in dividing the human being into
three systems, i.e. the head man, the trunk man and the limb man, we
must be careful not to imagine that these three are external to one
another within external spatial boundaries. Man is of course wholly
head man, but qualitatively distributed. That which has its chief
focus in the head, also extends over the whole man. The same is true
of the other main systems, circulation system, limb and metabolic
system; they too, extend throughout man's body. So the tendency to
mineralisation, localised chiefly in the head, exists and must be
counteracted all through the body. Here is a field of knowledge of
which the contemporary student can no longer understand anything when
he glances through the ancient treatises written in the light of
atavistic clairvoyance. For after all, only the smallest minority of
those who trouble to read that Paracelsus writes of the salt-process,
get any worth-while idea from it today. But the salt-process belongs
to the region that I am now outlining, just as the sulphur process
belongs to the region previously described.
Man has an inherent tendency to mineralisation; just as the forces
fundamental to the development of our internal flora and fauna can get
“out of hand,” so also can the mineralising tendency. How is it to be
counteracted? Only by shattering it; by, as it were, driving a
perpetual succession of minute wedges into it. And here you enter the
region where you have to pass from serotherapy through vegetable
therapy to mineral therapy. You cannot do without this, as you only
reach a starting ground for the support of all that needs support, in
man's struggle against mineralisation, against general sclerosis, in
the interaction between the minerals and those human substances which
tend themselves to become minerals. It does not suffice simply to
introduce the mineral, in its crude state as found in the external
world, into the human organism. The right method would indicate some
form of the homeopathic principle. For it is precisely from the
mineral kingdom that we must set free the forces opposed to the action
of the external forces of that kingdom.
It is a sound comment (and one already made) that we have only to turn
our attention to the very slight mineral content of many medicinal
springs, which have a remedial effect, in order to observe a
conspicuous homeopathic process. This process shows that at the very
instant in which we liberate the mineral components from their
externally known forces, other forces emerge which can only be fully
liberated through homeopathic dosage. This subject shall be given
special consideration later on. But I would add the following
consideration today, and address my remarks particularly to the
younger members of my audience.
Let us assume that you are making comparative investigations into the
structural changes of the whole intestinal system, let us say from the
fishes, through the Amphibia to the reptiles — the conditions in the
Amphibia and reptiles in this respect, are most interesting — to the
birds on the one side, and the mammals, and finally, man, on the
other. You will find that remarkable changes of form occur in the
organs. For instance, there are the Caeca the equivalent of what has
become the vermiform appendix in man; in the lower mammals, or, in
bird groups which deviate from the normal type — the rudiments of the
vermiform appendix appear. Or study the quite different way in which
the great gut, which does not exist in fishes, evolves through the
ascent of so-called more perfect classes, into what we can recognise
as the larger intestine (colon). Between this and the manner in which
caeca become what we recognise as the appendix in mankind, (certain
species of animals have several appendices) you will find a remarkable
complementary relationship.
A comparative study should bring this interrelationship into sharp
relief. Of course you can put the question from the outside, as it
were, and you know how often it is so put: why is there such a thing
as the vermiform appendix in mankind? Yes, that is often asked. And
if the question is raised, it is generally forgotten that man exhibits
a duality, so that what originates in the lower sphere has always
complementary organ in the upper, and that certain organs of the upper
sphere could not evolve without their complementary organs, almost
their opposite poles, in the lower. The more the fore-brain
approximates to the form which it reaches in mankind, the more evolved
does the intestine become in the direction of the process of the
depositing of waste material. There is a close correspondence between
cerebral and intestinal formation; if the great gut and the caecum did
not appear in the course of animal evolution, it would not be possible
for men capable of thinking, to arise on a physical basis; for man
possesses the brain, the organ of thinking at the expense — I repeat,
entirely at the expense of his intestinal organs, and the intestinal
organs are the exact reverse side of the brain parts. You are relieved
of the need for physical action in order to think; but instead your
organism is burdened with the functions of the highly developed larger
intestine and bladder. Thus the highest activities of soul and spirit
manifested in the physical world through man, so far as they are
dependent on a complete brain formation, are also dependent on the
equivalent structure of the intestine.
This crucially important inter-relationship throws much light on the
whole way in which nature works. For, however paradoxical, it is
nevertheless permissible to say, that man has a vermiform appendix in
order that he may think like a human being. That which shapes and
reveals itself in the appendix, has its polar complement in the human
brain. All that is in one sphere has its analogies in the other. These
are facts which must be acquired once more through new methods of
knowledge. We cannot merely echo the physicians of antiquity, who
based their doctrine on atavistic perceptions. That road will not lead
us to many results. We must reconquer these truths ourselves. And in
that reconquest we shall find the purely materialistic achievements of
medicine, which are averse from such associations, a real obstacle.
For medicine and biology today, the brain is simply an internal organ
and so are the contents of the abdomen and pelvis; entrails, all of
them. And thus they made the same mistake as if they identified
positive with negative electricity; just electricity, what is the
difference? The mistake here is quite analogous but is overlooked.
For, just as between positive and negative electricity there arise
tensions which then seek their equilibrium, there is also perpetual
tension within man, between the upper and lower organic spheres. And
the control of this tension really comprises what we must search for
in the field of medicine. This tension also manifests itself (I will
merely indicate this today, but treat it in detail later) through the
forces concentrated in two organs: the Pineal Gland and the so-called
Pituitary Gland. In the pineal, all those forces are focused and
marshaled which are contrary to those of the pituitary, the
hypophysis cerebri, that is to those which are of the nature of the
lower organic sphere. It is a mutual relation of opposing tensions.
And if we were in the habit of forming an opinion of the state of this
balance of tensions, from the general health of the individual case,
we should have laid a very sound foundation for the remedial treatment
to follow.
|