Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

The Gospel of St. John
GA 103

23 May 1908, Hamburg

V. The Seven Degrees of Initiation

The First Sign

In a consideration of the Gospel of St. John, we should never lose sight of that most important point which was brought out in the lecture yesterday namely, that in the original writer of the Gospel we have to do with the “Beloved Disciple,” initiated by Christ-Jesus Himself. One might naturally ask if, aside from occult knowledge, there exists, perhaps, some external proof of this statement by means of which the writer of this Gospel has intimated that he came to a higher order of knowledge about the Christ through the “raising,” through the initiation which is represented in the so-called miracle of the raising of Lazarus. If you will read the Gospel of St. John carefully, you will observe, that nowhere previous to that chapter which treats of the raising of Lazarus is there any mention of the “Disciple whom the Lord loved.” In other words, the real author of the Gospel wishes to say: What precedes this chapter does not yet have its origin in the knowledge which I have received through initiation, therefore in the beginning you must disregard me. Only later does he mention the “Disciple whom the Lord loved.” Thus the Gospel falls into two important parts, the first part in which the Disciple whom the Lord loved is not yet mentioned because he had not yet been initiated, and that part which comes after the raising of Lazarus in which this Disciple is mentioned. Nowhere in the document itself will you find any contradictions of what I have presented in the previous lectures. Naturally, anyone who considers the Gospel only superficially will easily pass this by, will not notice it and at the present time when everything is popularized, when all manner of knowledge is forced upon us, we can often experience as an extraordinary spectacle much of a very doubtful character in this knowledge.

Who would not consider it a blessing if all kinds of knowledge could be brought to the people through such inexpensive literature as the Reclam'sche Universal Bibliothek. Among the last volumes, one has appeared on the Origin of the Bible. The author entitles himself a Doctor of Theology. He is, then, a theologian! He believes that throughout all the chapters of the Gospel of St. John, from the 35th verse of the 1st Chapter, John, the author of the Gospel, is the one referred to. When this little book came into my hands, I really could not believe my eyes and said to myself: there must be something very extraordinary under consideration here that repudiates all previous occult points of view that the Beloved Disciple is not mentioned before the “raising of Lazarus.” Still, a theologian ought to know! In order not to pass judgment too quickly, take up the Gospel of St. John and see for yourselves what stands there: “Again the next day after, John stood and two of his disciples.” Here John the Baptist and two of his disciples are spoken of. The most generous point of view that one can take toward this theologian is that his consciousness was filled with an ancient exoteric tradition which declares that John, the author of the Gospel, is one of these two disciples. This tradition is supported by Matthew IV 21. But, the Gospel of St. John cannot be explained by means of the other Gospels. A theologian therefore was responsible for introducing into popular literature a very harmful book. And if one knows how such a thing which is brought to the people in just this way continues to spread, it is possible to measure the harm which arises out of it. This is just an interpellation, in order that a certain protective wall may be erected against all kinds of objections which might perhaps be brought forward in refutation of what has been said here.

Now let us hold in mind that what preceded the “raising of Lazarus” is a communication of weighty matters, but that the writer has reserved the most profound matters for the chapters subsequent to that event. Nevertheless, he wished throughout to indicate that the content of his Gospel is something which will be thoroughly understood only by one who has attained a certain degree of initiation. Therefore he indicates in various passages that what is communicated in the first chapters has to do with a certain kind and degree of initiation. You already know that there are different degrees of initiation. For example, in a certain form of oriental initiation, seven degrees can be distinguished and these seven degrees were designated by all sorts of symbolical names. The first was the degree of the “Raven,” the second that of the ”Occultist,” the third of the “Warrior,” the fourth that of the “Lion.” Amongst different peoples, who still felt a kind of blood relationship as the expression of their group-soul, the fifth degree was designated by the name of the folk itself; thus among the Persians, for example, an initiate of the fifth degree was called in an occult sense, a “Persian.” When we understand what these names signify, then the justification of these titles will soon be evident.

An initiate of the first degree is one who constitutes an intermediary between the hidden and the outer life, one who is sent from place to place. In this first degree the neophyte must devote himself with complete resignation to the outer life, but what he ascertains there, he must bring back into the Mystery Places. One speaks of the “Raven” when words have something to communicate to the inner world of the Mystery Places from the world outside. Just call to mind the ravens of Elias, or the ravens of Wotan, even the ravens of the Barbarossa Saga, that had to discover when it was time to come forth. The initiate of the second degree stood fully within the occult life. One who was of the third degree was allowed to defend occult knowledge. The degree of the “Warrior” does not mean one who fights, but one who defends occult teaching, what the occult life has to give. One who is a “Lion” embodies the occult life within himself in such a way that he defends occultism, not only in words, but also in acts, that is, with deeds of a magical sort. The sixth degree is that of the “Sun-hero” and the seventh that of the “Father.” The fifth degree is the one we shall now consider.

The human being of ancient times was especially a part of his community and therefore when he was conscious of his ego, he felt himself more as a member of a group-soul than as an individual. But the initiate of the fifth degree had made a certain sacrifice, had so far stripped off his own personality that he took the folk-soul into his own being. While other men felt their souls within the folk-soul, he took the folk-soul into his own being, and this was because all that belonged to his personality was of no importance to him but only the common folk-spirit. Therefore an initiate of this kind was called by the name of his particular folk.

Now we know that in the Gospel of St. John it is said that Nathaniel also was one of the first disciples of Christ-Jesus. He was brought before the Christ. He is not so highly developed that he is able to comprehend the Christ. The Christ is, of course, the Spirit of all-inclusive Knowledge which cannot be fathomed by a Nathaniel, an initiate of the fifth degree. But the Christ could fathom Nathaniel. This was shown by two facts.

How did Christ designate him? “This man is a true Israelite!” Here we have the designation according to the name of the folk. Just as among the Persians, an initiate of the fifth degree is called a Persian, so among the Israelites, he is called an Israelite. Therefore Christ calls Nathaniel an Israelite. He then says to him: “Even before Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig-tree, I saw thee!” That is a symbolical designation of an initiate like the Budha sitting under the Bodhi Tree. The fig-tree is a symbol of Egyptian-Chaldean initiation. He meant with these words: I well know that thou art an initiate of a certain degree, and canst perceive certain things, for I saw thee! Then Nathaniel recognized Him: “Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God; Thou art the King of Israel!” This word “King” signifies in this connection: Thou art one who is higher than I, otherwise thou couldst not say, “I saw thee when thou sattest under the fig-tree.” And Christ answered, “Thou believest in me because I said that I saw thee under the fig-tree: thou shalt see greater things than these.” The words “verily, verily” we shall speak about later. Then He said: “I say unto you, ye shall see the angels of Heaven ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.” Yet greater things than they had already seen would be seen by those who were able to recognize the Christ. Again, one may ask: What significant words are these?

In order to make this clear, let us call to mind what the human being really is. We have said that he is a different creature by day than by night. During the day his four human members, physical body, ether body, astral body, and ego are bound closely together. They react upon each other. We may say that when the human being is awake during the day, in a certain way his physical and etheric bodily parts are permeated and cared for by his astral and ego spiritual parts. But we have also shown that something else must be active within the etheric and physical bodily parts in order that the human being be able to exist at all in his present phase of evolution. For we have called attention to the fact that every night he draws out those members which care for this physical and ether body, namely, the astral body and ego, thus leaving his physical and ether bodies to their own fate. You all, as astral body and ego, faithlessly desert your physical and ether bodies every night. Hence you will see that Spiritual Science points out with a certain correctness that divine-spiritual powers and forces stream through the physical and ether bodies during the night so that they are, as it were, invested by these divine-spiritual forces and beings. We have also pointed out that when the astral body and ego were outside the physical and ether bodies in those periods which we call the Jahve or Jehova epochs, that Jehova was active as an inspirer. But it was the true Light, the Fullness of the Godhead or of the Elohim, the Pleroma, that was also constantly radiating through the physical and ether bodies. However, the human being, not having yet received the necessary impulse from the Christ-principle before the appearance of this Principle upon the earth, was not able to recognize it. Those principles which are to come to expression in the physical body, dwell in the higher spiritual regions of Devachan. The spiritual beings and powers which work upon the physical body are at home in the higher heavenly spheres, in higher Devachan, and those powers which work upon the ether body are in their own sphere in the lower heavenly realms. So we may say that in this physical body there are constantly active, beings from the highest regions of Devachan and in the ether body, beings from the lower devachanic regions are active. Men can recognize them only after having received the Impulse of the Christ into themselves. “If you truly understand the Son of Man, you will perceive how the spiritual forces descending from and ascending to the heavenly spheres work upon mankind. This you will know through the impulse which the Christ gives to the earth.”

What now follows, was mentioned in the lecture yesterday. The Marriage at Cana in Galilee is often called “the first of the miracles”—it were better to call it “the first sign” which Christ-Jesus made. Now in order that we may understand the stupendousness of the significance of the Marriage at Cana, we shall need to consider as a whole, much of what we have been hearing in the last lectures.

In the first place we have here a marriage—but why a marriage in Galilee? We shall understand why it is a marriage in Galilee if we call to mind once more the whole mission of the Christ. His mission consisted in bringing to mankind the full force of the ego, an inner independence in the soul. The individual ego should feel itself fully independent and separate, existing completely within itself and people should be united in marriage because of a love which they freely and voluntarily bestow upon one another. Through the Christ-Principle there should come into the earth-mission a love that would rise ever higher and higher above the material and constantly mount toward the Spirit. Love had its beginning in its lowest form which was bound up with the senses. In the earliest periods of human evolution, those who were bound together by the tie of blood loved each other and they made a great deal of the idea that love was based upon this material blood relationship.

The Christ came in order to spiritualize this love; in order, on the one hand, to loosen the bonds in which love had been entangled through the blood-relationship and on the other hand to give force and intensity to spiritual Love. Among the followers of the Old Testament we still see expressed most completely what we may call membership in the group-soul acting as the foundation of the individual ego within the Universal Ego. We have seen that the expression “I and Father Abraham are one” had a definite meaning for the adherents of the Old Testament. It meant that they felt themselves safe in the consciousness that that blood which ran through the veins of Father Abraham flowed on down even to themselves. Therefore they felt themselves secure within the whole and only those were considered members of the whole who came into being through human propagation maintained by means of this blood relationship. In the very beginning of human evolution upon the earth, marriage took place only within very narrow circles, within families related by blood. Endogamy, (marriage within the tribe) was closely adhered to. Then the narrow blood-circle gradually widened and men began to marry outside the family, but not yet within other peoples or folk. The folk of the Old Testament held fast to the idea that the folk blood relationship should be maintained. One is a “Jew” who in his blood is a Jew.

Christ Jesus did not advocate this principle. He appealed to those who had broken this principle of mere blood relationship, and the important thing He had to demonstrate, He demonstrated not in Judea, but outside in Galilee. Galilee was the region where peoples of every race and tribe had mixed together. The term Galilean means “mixed-breed,” “mongrel.” Christ Jesus went to the Galileans, to those who were most mixed. Out of a human reproduction such as this, brought about by a mingling of blood, something arose that was no longer dependent upon a physical basis of love. Therefore what He wished to say, was said at a marriage. But why at a marriage? Because at the time of a marriage reference can be made to the reproduction of human beings. And what He wished to demonstrate, He did not wish to show at a place where marriage took place within narrow boundaries, within the blood-bond, but where it was entered into independently of the tie of blood. Therefore what He had to say was said at a marriage—and at a marriage in Galilee. If we wish to understand what is expressed here, we must again turn our attention to the whole of human evolution.

It has often been said that for the occultist there is no such thing as the merely external, the purely material. All materiality is for him the expression of something of a soul-spirit nature, and just as your face is the expression of something of a soul-spirit nature, so too is the light of the sun the expression of a soul-spirit light. All that occurs apparently only in the material physical world is at the same time the expression of deeper spiritual processes. Occultism does not deny matter. For it, even the grossest matter is the expression of a soul-spirit something. Thus material facts correspond to the spiritual evolutionary processes of the world, always running parallel with them.

If in spirit we look back over human evolution to the time when mankind still lived upon an ancient Continent lying between Europe and America, upon ancient Atlantis, passing over from there into the later post-Atlantean period, we can see how generation after generation has at last led right up to ourselves. If we consider from the standpoint of race the whole significance of human evolution from the 4th to the 5th Root-race, we can see, as it were, that out of an Atlantean humanity, wholly or completely immersed in the group-soul, the individual ego of the human personality gradually evolved and slowly matured in the post-Atlantean period. What the Christ brought spiritually through His powerful spiritual impulse had to be prepared gradually through other impulses. What Jahve did was to implant the group-soul ego in the astral body and by gradually maturing it, prepare it for the reception of the fully independent “I AM.” But men could only comprehend this “I AM” when their physical body also became a fit instrument for sheltering It. You can easily imagine that the astral body might be ever so capable of receiving an ego, but if the physical body is not a fit instrument for truly comprehending the “I AM” with a waking consciousness then it is impossible to receive it. The physical body must also always be a suitable instrument for what is imprinted upon it here upon the earth. Therefore when the astral body had been matured, the physical body had to be prepared to become an instrument of the “I AM,” and this is what occurred in human evolution. We can follow the processes through which the physical body was prepared to become the bearer of the self-conscious, ego-endowed human being.

Even in the Bible it is pointed out that Noah who, in a certain sense was the progenitor of his race in the post-Atlantean period, was the first wine-drinker, the first to experience the effect of alcohol. Then we come to a chapter which may be really very shocking for many people. In the post-Atlantean period an extraordinary cultus arose; this was the worship of Dionysos. You all know that this worship was connected with wine. This extraordinary substance was first introduced to human beings in the post-Atlantean period and produced a certain effect upon them. You know that every substance has some effect upon the human creature and alcohol had a very definite action upon the human organism. In fact, in the course of human evolution, it has had a mission. Strange as it may seem, it has had the task, as it were, of preparing the human body so that it might be cut off from connection with the Divine, in order to allow the personal “I AM” to emerge. Alcohol has the effect of severing the connection of the human being with the spirit world in which he previously existed. It still has this effect today. It was not without reason that alcohol has had a place in human evolution. In the future of humanity, it will be possible to see in the fullest sense of the word that it was the mission of alcohol to draw men so deeply into materiality that they become egoistic, thus bringing them to the point of claiming the ego for themselves, no longer placing it at the service of the whole folk. Alcohol performed a service, the contrary of the one performed by the human group-soul. It deprived men of the capacity to feel themselves at one with the whole in the spirit world. Hence the Dionysian worship which cultivated a living together in a kind of external intoxication, a merging into the whole without observing this whole. Evolution in the post-Atlantean period has been connected with the worship of Dionysos, because this worship was a symbol of the function and mission of alcohol. Now, when mankind is again endeavouring to find its way back, when the ego has been so far developed that the human being is again able to find union with the divine spiritual powers, the time has come for a certain reaction, an unconscious one at first, to take place against alcohol. This reaction is now taking place and many persons today already feel that something which once had a very special significance is not forever justified.

No one should interpret what has been said concerning the mission of alcohol at a special period of time as, perhaps, favoring alcohol, but it should be understood that this has been stated in order to make clear that this alcoholic mission has been fulfilled and that different things are adapted to different periods. In the same period in which men were drawn most deeply into egotism through alcohol, there appeared a force stronger than all others which could give to them the greatest impulse for re-finding a union with the spiritual whole. On the one hand men had to descend to the lowest level in order that they might become independent and on the other hand a strong force must come which can give again the impulse for finding the path back to the Universal. The Christ indicated this to be His mission in the first of His signs. In the first place He had to point out that the ego must become independent; in the second place, that He was addressing Himself to those who had freed themselves from the blood relationship. He had to turn to a marriage where the physical bodies came under the influence of alcohol, because at this marriage wine would be drunk. And Christ Jesus showed how His mission had to proceed in the different earthly epochs. How often we hear extraordinary explanations of the meaning of the changing of water into wine. Even from the pulpit one hears that nothing else is meant than that the insipid water of the Old Testament should be superceded by the strong wine of the New. In all probability it was the wine-lovers who always liked this kind of an explanation, but these symbols are not so simple as that. It must be kept constantly in mind that the Christ said: My mission is one that points toward the far distant future when men will be brought to a union with the Godhead—that is to a love of the Godhead as a free gift of the independent ego. This love should bind men in freedom to the Godhead while formerly an inner compelling impulse of the group-soul had made them a part of It.

Let us now grasp in accordance with the prevailing thought of that time what men then experienced. Let us especially understand the thoughts that they held. It was declared that people were at one time united with the group-soul and felt their union with the Godhead. Then they developed a downward tendency and this was considered as an entanglement in matter, as a degeneration, a kind of falling away from the Divine, and the question was asked: whence came originally what the human being now possesses? From what has he fallen away? The further we go back in earthly evolution, the more we find the solid, earthly matter passing over into a fluidic state under the influence of warmer conditions. But we know that when the earth was much more fluidic than it became later on, human beings also existed, but they were much less detached from the Godhead than at a subsequent period. To the degree that the earth hardened, human things became materialized. At the time the earth was in a fluidic condition, the human being was contained within the watery element, but he could only walk about upon the earth after it had already deposited solid portions. Therefore, people felt the hardening of the physical body and could say: the human being was born out of the earth when it was still in its fluidic state, but at that time he was still wholly united with the Godhead. All that brought him into matter defiled him. Those who are to remember this ancient connection with the Divine were baptized with water. This was its symbol: Let yourself become conscious of your ancient union with the Godhead, conscious that you have become defiled, that you have descended to your present condition.

The Baptist also baptized in this way in order to bring mankind into a closer union with the Godhead. And this is what all baptism signified in ancient times. It is a radical expression, but one which brings to our consciousness what is meant. Christ Jesus had to baptize with something different. He had to direct men, not to the past, but to the future through the development of a spirituality in their inner being. Through the “holy,” the undimmed and undefiled Spirit, the human spirit could be united with the Godhead. Baptism by water was a baptism of remembrance, that of the Holy Spirit is one of prophecy pointing to the future. That relationship which has been wholly lost, and which baptism by water recalls to mind has also been lost in all that was expressed in the symbol of the wine, of the sacrificial wine. Dionysos was the dismembered God who was drawn into the individual souls, separate parts no longer knowing anything of one another. Humanity was split into many pieces and thrown into matter through what alcohol has brought to the world, alcohol the symbol of Dionysos. In the Marriage at Cana, a great principle was preserved, the instructive principle of evolution. There are, to be sure, absolute truths, but they cannot at all times be revealed to men without preparation. Each age must have its special function, its special truths. Why is it that we can speak today of reincarnation, etc.? Why are we able to sit together in such an assembly as this and foster Spiritual Science? We can do so, because all of the souls which are present within you today have been incarnated upon the earth in so and so many bodies and so and so many times. Very many of the souls which are within you now lived at one time in the Germanic countries where the Druid priests walked among you and brought to your souls Spiritual Wisdom in the form of myth and saga. And because your soul received it in that form at that time, it is now in the position to receive it in another form, the Anthroposophical. At that time it was in the form of pictures—today it is in the form of Anthroposophy. But then it would not have been possible to impart truth in its present form. Do not imagine that the ancient Druid priest would have been able to impart the truth in the form in which it is presented today. Anthroposophy is the form befitting the humanity of the present or of the immediate future. In later incarnations truth will be proclaimed, and men will work for it in quite different forms, and what is now called Anthroposophy will be related as something remembered, just as we now relate the Sagas and Fairy-tales. Anthroposophists should not be foolish enough to say that in ancient times there existed only stupidities and childish ideas, and that we alone have advanced the world so gloriously. Those, for example, who pretend to be monists do this. But we are working in Spiritual Science in preparation for the next epoch. For if our present age were not here, the next would likewise not come. No one should, however, make the future an excuse for present conduct. Much nonsense is indulged in also in respect of the teaching of Reincarnation. I have met people who said that in their present incarnation they did not need to be respectable human beings, because for this they had time enough later on. If, however, one does not begin with it today, the consequences will appear straightway in the next incarnation.

So we must understand clearly that there is nothing absolutely fixed in the forms of truth, but that what corresponds to a particular epoch of human evolution, always becomes known. That greatest impulse of evolution had, as it were, to descend even into the life customs of that time. For it had to clothe the highest truth in language and functions befitting the understanding of the particular period in question. Therefore by means of a kind of Dionysian rite or wine sacrifice, the Christ had to tell how mankind could raise itself to the Godhead. One should not fanatically ask why Christ changed the water into wine. The age should be taken into consideration. Through a sort of Dionysian rite, Christ had to prepare for what was to come.

Christ goes to the Galileans who are jumbled together out of all kinds of nationalities that were not bound by the blood-tie and there He performed the first Sign of His mission and He adapted Himself so fully to their habits of life that he turned water into wine for them. Let us hold clearly in mind what the Christ really wished to say by this: Those who have descended to the stage of materialism, symbolized by the drinking of wine, will I also lead to a union with the Spirit.—So He will be there, not alone for those who can be raised by means of the symbol of baptism, by water. It is very significant that we are shown at once that here are six vessels of purification. We shall return to this number. Purification is what is accomplished by means of baptism. If in those epochs in which the Gospel had its origin one wished to express the fact of baptism, it was spoken of as a purification. The word “baptism” was never actually used, but they said “to baptize,” and what resulted through baptism was called “purification.” Never will you find in the Gospel of St. John the corresponding ΒαπτιζΩ, except in verb form. But when it is used as a noun, it is the cleansing that is always meant, the process through which the human being is reminded of his state of purification, his relationship with the Godhead.

Even to the symbolical vessels of the rite of purification, Christ-Jesus undertook the Sign through which He indicated His mission as far as it was possible at that time. Thus in the marriage at Cana in Galilee, something of the profound mission of the Christ is expressed. He said: “My time will come in the future, it is not yet come. What I have to accomplish here has to do in part with what must be overcome through My mission.” He stands in the present and at the same time points to the future, thereby showing how He works for the age, not in an absolute but in a cultural, educational sense. It is the mother, therefore, who besought Him and said, “They have no wine.” But He replied: “What I have now to accomplish has still to do with ancient times, with me and thee, for My proper time has not yet come when wine will be transformed back again into water.” How could it have had any meaning at all to say, “Woman, what have I to do with thee?” when He then complied with what the mother had asked! It only has a meaning if we are shown that the present condition of humanity has been brought about because of the blood relationship and that a Sign has been performed in accordance with ancient usages which still needs the employment of alcohol in ordcr to point to the time when the independent ego shall have risen above the tie of the blood; it has a significance only when we are shown that for the present we must still reckon with ancient times which are symbolized by wine, but that a later time is coming which will be “His time.”

And chapter after chapter of the Gospel reveals to us two things. First it shows that what was communicated was for those who, in a certain way, were able to comprehend occult truths. In our times, exoteric Spiritual Science is presented in lectures, but at that period spiritual-scientific truths could only be understood by those who had been in a certain way actually initiated into this or that degree. Who were those who were able to understand something of what Christ-Jesus was saying about profound truths? Only those who were able to perceive outside of the physical body—those who could withdraw from the body and become conscious in the spirit world. If Christ-Jesus wished to speak to those who could understand Him, it had to be to those who were in a certain way initiated, those who could see spiritually. When, for example, He speaks of the re-birth of the soul in the chapter concerning His conversation with Nicodemus, we see that He is revealing these truths to someone who perceives with spiritual senses. You only need to read the following words:—

But there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews; the same came to Jesus by night.

Let us accustom ourselves to accuracy in dealing with words. We are told that Nicodemus came to Jesus “by night;” this means that he received outside of the physical body what Christ-Jesus had to communicate to him. “By night” means that when he makes use of his spiritual senses, he comes to Christ-Jesus. Just as in their conversation about the fig-tree, Nathaniel and Christ-Jesus understood one another as initiates, so too a faculty of understanding is indicated here also.

The second thing shown us in the Gospel is that Christ has always a mission to perform that has nothing to do with the mere blood tie. That is very clearly shown by His approaching the Samaritan woman at the well. He gave her the instructions which He gave those whose ego had been lifted above the common blood tie:

Then cometh He to a city of Samaria which is called Sychar, near to the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph.

Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus, therefore, being wearied with His journey, sat thus on the well: and it was about the sixth hour.

There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, “Give me to drink,” for His disciples were gone away into the city to buy meat.

Then saith the woman of Samaria unto Him, “How is it that thou, being a Jew, asketh drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria, for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.”

Here is indicated that it was something very strange that Christ should go to a people whose egos had been withdrawn, uprooted from the group-soul. That is the important thing.

In the narrative about the nobleman, we read further that the Christ not only breaks the bond of blood that binds men together in a marriage within the folk, but he breaks also that bond that separates them into classes. He came to those whose ego had been uprooted. He healed the son of the nobleman who, according to the interpretation of the Jews, was a stranger to Him. Throughout the Gospel it is pointed out that Christ is the missionary of the independent ego which is present in every human individual. Therefore, He could say:—“When I speak of Myself in a higher sense, of the I AM, I do not at all refer to my own ego residing within me, but to a being, to something which everyone possesses within himself. My ego is one with the Father, but in general the ego present in every personality is also one with the Father.” That is also the deeper meaning of the instructions which the Christ gave to the Samaritan woman at the well.

I should like to call your attention especially to a passage, which if rightly understood will enable you to come to a deep understanding. It is the passage from the 31st to the 34th verse of the 3rd chapter which naturally must be read so that the reader is conscious of its being John the Baptist who speaks these words:—

He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly and speaketh of the earth; he that cometh from heaven is above all. And what he hath seen and heard, to that he testifieth: and no man receiveth his testimony.

But he that hath received his testimony hath set his seal that God is true.

For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.

I should like to meet anyone who understands these words according to this translation. What a contradiction! “He whom God hath sent, speaketh the word of God, for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.” What is the sense of these words?

In countless utterances, Christ says: “When I speak of My Ego, I speak of the Eternal Ego in men which is one with the spiritual foundations of the world. When I speak of this Ego, I speak of something which dwells in the innermost depths of the human soul. If any man hears Me (and now He is speaking only of the lower ego which feels nothing of the Eternal) he receiveth not My testimony. He understands nothing of what I say, for I can speak of nothing that flows from Me to him. Otherwise he would not then be independent. Every one must find within himself as his own eternal base, the God which I proclaim.” A few verses back we find the passage:—

And John also was baptizing in Enon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came and were baptized.

Then there arose a question between some of John's disciples and the Jews about purification (this means about the form of baptism).

When such a question was raised in these circles, they were always speaking of the union with the Divine and of the submersion of humanity into matter and of how, according to the old idea of God, union with the Divine took place through the group-soul. Thus others came and said to John: “Jesus also baptizes!” And John had to make it clear to them that what had come into the world through Jesus was something very special and this he did by saying that Jesus does not teach that union symbolized by the ancient form of baptism, but teaches how men will be their own guides through the free gift of the now independent ego. And each individual must discover the “I AM,” the God, within himself. Only in this way is he in the position to find the Divine in his inner being. If these words are read thus, then the reader will be aware that He, the “I AM,” was sent from God. He who was sent from God, who was sent to enkindle the Divine in this way, also preached God in the true sense, no longer according to the blood tie.

Let us translate these passages according to their true meaning, for we have now the basis for such a translation, if we understand how the teachings of the ancients were presented. They were poetically portrayed in many books. We need only recall the Psalms of the Old Testament where in beautifully constructed language, the Divine was proclaimed. At that time the ancient blood-relationship was spoken of only as a relationship with a God. This could all be learned, but all that was learned through it was nothing more than that one was related to this ancient divinity. But, if there was a desire to comprehend the Christ, then all the ancient laws, all the ancient artificialities were unnecessary. What the Christ taught could be understood to the degree that men understood the spiritual ego within themselves. At that time, it is true, it was not possible to have full knowledge of Divinity, but one could understand what was heard from the lips of Christ-Jesus. The preliminary conditions for understanding were there. The Psalms were not then necessary, nor all the poetically constructed teachings, for all that was needed was the simplest means of expression. One needed only to speak in halting words to become a witness of God. Even in the simplest, stammering words it was possible to become a witness of the Divine; it need be only single words without metre. Anyone who felt in his ego that he was sent from God, even though he were halting in his speech, could understand the words of the Christ. Anyone knowing only the earthly relationship with God speaks in the poetic measure of the Psalms, but all his metre leads him to nothing but the ancient gods. However, anyone who felt himself deeply rooted in the spirit worlds is above all, and can bear witness of what has been seen and heard in those worlds. But those who accepted a testimony only in the accustomed way did not accept His. If there were those who accepted it, they showed by their acceptance that they felt themselves sent from God. They not only believed, they understood what the other one said to them, and through their understanding they bore witness of their words. “He who feels the ego, reveals even in his stammering words the Word of God.” This is what is meant, for the spirit here referred to does not need to express itself in metre, in any form of syllabic measure, but it can declare itself in the simplest, halting manner. Such words can easily be taken as a license for folly. But whoever refuses wisdom just because, in his opinion, the most sublime mysteries should be expressed in the simplest form possible, does so, although often quite unconsciously, merely from an inclination toward psychic ease. When it is said, “God giveth not the spirit by measure” (metre), it only means that the “measure” or metre does not help towards the spirit. But where the spirit really exists, there also is “measure.” Not everyone who has “measure” has the “spirit;” but one who has the “spirit” will come most certainly to “measure” or metre. Naturally, certain things cannot be reversed. It is not an evidence of possessing the “spirit” if one has no “measure;” nor is the possession of “measure” a proof of the “spirit.” Science is certainly no sign of wisdom, nor is a lack of science a proof of it.

So we are shown that Christ appeals to the independent ego in every human soul. “Measure” you must consider here as metre, poetically constructed speech. Then the foregoing sentence will read: “He who finds God in the ‘I AM, bears witness of Divine Speech or God's language, even in his stammering words”—and he finds the way to God.

Fünfter Vortrag

[ 1 ] Bei den Betrachtungen über das Johannes-Evangelium dürfen wir nirgends die ganz prinzipielle Auseinandersetzung außer acht lassen, die wir gestern gepflogen haben, nämlich, daß wir es in dem ursprünglichen Verfasser des Johannes-Evangeliums zu tun haben mit dem von dem Christus Jesus selbst eingeweihten Lieblingsschüler. Es könnte jemand nun natürlich fragen: Ja, ist denn, ganz abgesehen von dem okkulten Wissen, auch vielleicht ein äußeres Zeugnis dafür vorhanden, durch welches der Verfasser des Johannes-Evangeliums erraten läßt, daß er zu der höheren Art des Wissens über den Christus durch die Auferweckung, durch die Einweihung, die im sogenannten Lazaruswunder dargestellt ist, gekommen sei? — Wenn Sie das Johannes-Evangelium sorgfältig lesen, werden Sie eines bemerken. Sie werden bemerken, daß nirgends im Johannes-Evangelium, aber auch gar nirgends vor jenem Kapitel, das die Auferweckung des Lazarus behandelt, von dem Jünger, «den der Herr lieb hatte» (13, 23), die Rede ist; das heißt, der eigentliche Verfasser des JohannesEvangeliums will sagen: Dasjenige, was vorher ist, das stammt noch nicht aus dem Wissen, das mir durch die Einweihung geworden ist, da müßt ihr noch zunächst von mir absehen. Nachher erwähnt er erst den Jünger, «den der Herr lieb hatte». Dadurch also zerfällt das Johannes-Evangelium in zwei wichtige Teile: in einen ersten Teil, wo der Jünger, den der Herr lieb hatte, noch nicht erwähnt wird, weil er noch nicht eingeweiht war; und erst nach der Auferweckung des Lazarus, da wird dieser Jünger erwähnt. Nirgends in der Urkunde selbst werden Sie einen Widerspruch finden mit dem, was in den letzten Vorträgen angeführt worden ist. Natürlich liest ein das Evangelium nur äußerlich betrachtender Mensch leicht darüber hinweg, beachtet es nicht; und man muß heute, wo alles popularisiert wird, wo allerlei Weisheit zu den Menschen dringt, das eigentümliche Schauspiel erleben, daß wirklich oft recht Zweifelhaftes unter dieser Weisheit ist.

[ 2 ] Wer würde es nicht als einen Segen betrachten, daß durch solche billige Literatur, wie es die «Reclamsche Universal-Bibliothek» ist, allerlei Wissen unter das Volk getragen wird. Nun ist unter den letzten Heften auch eines erschienen über «Die Entstehung der Bibel». Der Verfasser nennt sich auf dem Titel einen Doktor der Theologie, er ist also Theologe. Er meint, daß auf den Verfasser des JohannesEvangeliums eigentlich durch alle Kapitel des Johannes-Evangeliums hindurch, von dem 35.Vers an im ersten Kapitel auf den Johannes hingewiesen würde. Als mir dieses Büchlein zur Hand kam, traute ich wirklich meinen Augen nicht und sagte mir: Da muß doch eigentlich etwas ganz Sonderbares vorliegen, was gegen alle bisherigen okkulten Ansichten - daß der Lieblingsschüler nicht vor der Auferweckung des Lazarus erwähnt werde - verstößt. Aber ein Theologe sollte es doch wissen! Nun, um nicht gar zu schnell abzuurteilen, nehmen Sie das Johannes-Evangelium in die Hand und sehen Sie, was da steht: «Des andern Tages stund abermal Johannes und zween seiner Jünger» (1, 35). Johannes wird erwähnt, der Täufer, und von zweien seiner Jünger wird gesprochen. Das Günstigste, das für diesen Theologen angenommen werden kann, ist, daß sein Bewußtsein erfüllt ist von einer alten exoterischen Tradition, die da besagt: unter den zweien Jüngern sei der eine der Johannes. Diese Tradition stützt sich auf Matthäus 4, 21. Aber man darf das Johannes-Evangelium nicht durch die anderen Evangelien erklären. Ein Theologe hat es also zustande gebracht, ein direkt schädliches Buch hineinzubringen in die populäre Literatur; und wenn man weiß, wie das weiter frißt, was gerade auf diese Weise durch eine solche billige Literatur unter das Volk kommt, dann kann man den Schaden abmessen, der daraus entspringt. Das sollte nur eine Zwischenbemerkung sein, damit eine gewisse Schutzwand aufgerichtet wird gegen allerlei Einwände, die etwas anführen könnten gegen das, was hier gesagt wird.

[ 3 ] Nun wollen wir einmal ins Auge fassen, daß das, was der Auferweckung des Lazarus vorangeht, zwar die Mitteilung ganz gewaltiger Dinge ist, daß sich aber der Verfasser erst für die Kapitel nach der Auferweckung des Lazarus die allertiefsten Dinge aufbewahrt hat. Dennoch wollte er überall darauf hinweisen, daß der Inhalt seines Evangeliums etwas ist, worüber nur derjenige Bescheid weiß, der bis zu einem gewissen Grade eingeweiht ist. Daher deutet er an verschiedenen Stellen darauf hin, daß man in den Dingen, die in den ersten Kapiteln mitgeteilt sind, es zu tun habe mit einer Art von Einweihung bis zu einem gewissen Grade. Es gibt eben Einweihungen verschiedener Grade. Man unterschied zum Beispiel in einer gewissen Form morgenländischer Einweihung sieben Grade der Einweihung, und diese sieben Grade der Einweihung benannte man mit allerlei symbolischen Namen. Der erste Grad war der Grad des «Raben», der zweite der des «Okkulten», der dritte der des «Streiters», der vierte der des «Löwen». Der fünfte Grad wird nun bei den verschiedenen Völkern, die noch eine Art von Blutzusammengehörigkeit fühlten als den Ausdruck ihrer Gruppenseele, bezeichnet mit dem Namen des Volkes; also bei den Persern zum Beispiel wird ein im fünften Grade Eingeweihter erst im okkulten Sinne ein «Perser» genannt. Wenn wir uns klarmachen, was diese Namen bedeuten, wird uns die Berechtigung dieser Benennungen bald erscheinen.

[ 4 ] Ein im ersten Grade Eingeweihter ist derjenige, der die Vermittelung zwischen dem okkulten und dem äußeren Leben bildet, der hin und her gesandt wird. Auf der ersten Stufe hat sich der Mensch noch mit voller Hingebung dem äußeren Leben zu widmen, aber das, was er erkundet, hat er hineinzutragen in die Einweihungsstätten. Von «Raben» spricht man also da, wo Worte von außen nach innen irgend etwas zu vermitteln haben. Erinnern Sie sich an die Raben des Elias oder an die Raben des Wotan, selbst noch an die Raben in der Barbarossa-Sage, wo sie erkunden sollen, ob es schon Zeit ist, herauszukommen. Der im zweiten Grade Eingeweihte stand schon voll im okkulten Leben. Einer, der im dritten Grade war, durfte für das Okkulte eintreten; der Grad des «Streiters» bedeutet nicht einen Menschen, der da streitet, sondern einen, der für die okkulten Lehren eintreten darf, für das, was das okkulte Leben zu geben vermag. Derjenige, der ein «Löwe» ist, ist ein solcher, der das okkulte Leben in sich verwirklicht; so daß er nicht bloß mit Worten für das Okkulte eintreten darf, sondern auch mit Taten, das heißt mit einer Art magischer Taten. Der sechste Grad ist der Grad des «Sonnenhelden», und der siebente Grad ist der Grad des «Vaters». Für uns kommt der fünfte Grad in Betracht.

[ 5 ] Der Mensch stand ja besonders in alten Zeiten innerhalb seiner Gemeinschaft und fühlte sich deshalb auch, wenn er sein Ich fühlte, mehr als Mitglied einer Gruppenseele. Wer aber Eingeweihter des fünften Grades war, hatte ein gewisses Opfer dargebracht, seine Persönlichkeit so weit abgestreift, daß er in seine Persönlichkeit das Wesen des Volkes aufnahm. Wie der andere Mensch seine Seele in der Volksseele fühlte, so hatte er die Volksseele in sich aufgenommen, weil alles, was Persönlichkeit war, für ihn nicht in Betracht kam, sondern nur der allgemeine Volksgeist. Deshalb bezeichnete man einen solchen Eingeweihten mit dem Namen des betreffenden Volkes. - Nun wissen wir, daß uns im Johannes-Evangelium gesagt wird, daß unter den ersten Jüngern des Christus Jesus auch Nathanael ist. Er wird dem Christus vorgeführt. Er ist nicht so hoch eingeweiht, daß er den Christus zu durchschauen vermöchte. Der Christus ist natürlich der Geist des umfassenden Wissens, der von einem Nathanael, einem im fünften Grade Eingeweihten, nicht durchschaut werden kann. Aber der Christus durchschaut den Nathanael. Das zeigt sich durch zwei Tatsachen. Wie bezeichnet er selbst ihn?

«Das ist ein rechter Israeliter!» (1, 47)

[ 6 ] Da haben Sie die Bezeichnung nach dem Namen des Volkes. Wie man bei den Persern einen im fünften Grade Eingeweihten einen «Perser » nannte, so nannte man einen solchen bei den Israeliten einen «Israeliter». Daher nennt Christus den Nathanael einen «Israeliter». Und dann sagt er ihm:

«Ehe denn dich Philippus rief, da du unter dem Feigenbaum warest, sah ich dich!» (1, 48)

[ 7 ] Das ist eine symbolische Bezeichnung für einen Eingeweihten, geradeso wie das Sitzen Buddhas unter dem Bodhi-Baum. Der Feigenbaum ist ein Symbol der ägyptisch-chaldäischen Einweihung. Er will ihm damit sagen: Oh, ich weiß wohl, daß du ein in gewissem Sinne Eingeweihter bist und gewisse Dinge durchschauen kannst, denn ich sah dich. Und nun erkennt ihn Nathanael:

«Nathanael antwortet und spricht zu ihm: ‹Meister, du bist Gottes Sohn und ein König in Israel.› » (1, 49)

[ 8 ] Das Wort «König» bedeutet in dieser Zusammensetzung: Du bist ein Höherer als ich, denn sonst könntest du nicht sagen: «Da du unter dem Feigenbaum saßest, sah ich dich.» Und der Christus antwortet darauf:

«Du glaubest mir, weil ich dir gesagt habe, daß ich dich gesehen habe unter dem Feigenbaum; du wirst noch Größeres denn das sehen.» (1, 50)

[ 9 ] Die Worte «wahrlich, wahrlich» werden wir noch zu besprechen haben. Dann sagt er:

«Ich sage euch, ihr werdet die Engel des Himmels auf den Menschensohn auf- und niedersteigen schen!» (1, 51)

[ 10 ] Größeres, als sie schon gesehen haben, werden die noch sehen, die Christus zu erkennen vermögen. Was ist das wieder für ein bedeutsames Wort?

[ 11 ] Um es zu erklären, erinnern wir uns daran, was der Mensch zunächst eigentlich ist. Wir haben gesagt, daß der Mensch ein verschiedener ist bei Tag und bei Nacht. Bei Tag sind die vier Glieder des Menschen: physischer Leib, Ätherleib, astralischer Leib und Ich, in einer festen Verbindung miteinander. Sie wirken aufeinander. Wir dürfen sagen, wenn der Mensch wacht bei Tage, dann wird in einer gewissen Weise seine physische Körperlichkeit und seine ätherische Leiblichkeit von seinem Astralisch-Geistigen und von seinem IchGeistigen durchdrungen und versorgt. Aber wir haben auch gezeigt, wie in dem Ätherisch-Leiblichen und in dem Physisch-Körperlichen noch etwas anderes wirksam sein muß, damit der Mensch überhaupt bestehen kann in seiner heutigen Entwickelungsphase. Denn wir haben uns darauf besonnen, daß der Mensch jede Nacht dasjenige, was selbst seinen physischen Leib und seinen Ätherleib versorgt, nämlich Astralleib und Ich, herauszieht und so seinen physischen Leib und Ätherleib die ganze Nacht über ihrem eigenen Schicksale überläßt. Treulos verlassen Sie alle jede Nacht Ihren physischen Leib und Ihren Ätherleib. Daraus werden Sie erkennen, daß die Geisteswissenschaft mit einem gewissen Recht darauf hinweist, daß göttlichgeistige Mächte und Kräfte in der Nacht diesen physischen Leib, diesen Ätherleib durchströmen, so daß also Ihr physischer Leib und Ätherleib sozusagen in die göttlich-geistigen Kräfte und Wesenheiten eingeschaltet sind. Wir haben auch darauf hingewiesen, daß gerade, wenn der astralische Leib und das Ich in alten Zeiten - in den Zeiten, die wir die Jahve- oder Jehovazeit nannten — außerhalb des physischen Leibes und Ätherleibes waren, daß da Jehova inspirierend wirkte. Das wahre Licht aber, die Fülle der Gottheit oder der Elohim, das Pleroma, ist es, was auch den physischen Leib und den Ätherleib immer durchstrahlt; nur kann es der Mensch nicht erkennen, weil er ja von dem Christus-Prinzip noch nicht den dazu notwendigen Impuls erhalten hat vor dem Erscheinen dieses Prinzipes auf der Erde. Diejenigen Prinzipien, die im physischen Leibe zum Ausdruck kommen sollen, sie wohnen im höheren Geistigen, im Devachan. Die geistigen Wesenheiten und Mächte, die auf den physischen Leib wirken, sind zu Hause in den höheren himmlischen Sphären, in dem höheren Devachan; und diejenigen Mächte, die auf den Ätherleib wirken, sind in den niederen himmlischen Sphären zu Hause. So können wir sagen: In diesen physischen Leib hinein wirken fortwährend Wesenheiten aus den höchsten Regionen des Devachan, und auf den Ätherleib wirken fortwährend Wesenheiten aus den niederen Regionen des Devachan. Sie kann der Mensch erst erkennen, wenn er die Impulse des Christus in sich aufnimmt: Lernt ihr den Menschensohn wirklich erkennen, dann werdet ihr erkennen, wie die geistigen Kräfte am Menschen auf- und niedersteigen aus den himmlischen Sphären. Das wird euch kund werden durch den Impuls, den der Christus der Erde gibt!

[ 12 ] Auf das, was nun folgt, ist schon gestern hingewiesen worden. Es ist die Hochzeit zu Kana in Galiläa, was man oft auch nennt «das erste der Wunder», besser würde man sagen «das erste der Zeichen», die der Christus Jesus tut (2, 1-11). Um nun zu verstehen das Gewaltige, das darin liegt, müssen wir vieles zusammenfassen von dem, was wir in den letzten Vorträgen gehört haben.

[ 13 ] Zunächst ist hier die Rede von einer Hochzeit. Warum aber eine Hochzeit in Galiläa? Wir werden verstehen, warum es eine Hochzeit in Galiläa ist, wenn wir uns die ganze Mission des Christus noch einmal vor die Seele rufen. Seine Mission besteht darin, dem Menschen die volle Kraft des Ich, die innere Selbständigkeit in die Seele zu bringen. Das einzelne Ich sollte sich in völliger Selbständigkeit und Abgeschlossenheit, in völligem Stehen-in-sich-selber fühlen, und durch die Liebe, die als eine freie Gabe gegeben wird, soll Mensch mit Mensch zusammengeführt werden. Eine Liebe also soll durch das Christus-Prinzip in die Erdenmission hineinkommen, die immer mehr und mehr über das Materielle erhaben ist und immer mehr und mehr in Geistiges aufsteigt. Ausgegangen ist die Liebe von ihrer niedersten Form, die an die Sinnlichkeit gebunden ist. Dasjenige liebte sich in den ursprünglichen Menschheitszeiten, was durch Blutsbande miteinander verbunden war, und man hielt ungemein viel darauf, daß die Liebe diese materielle Basis der Blutsverwandtschaft habe. Der Christus war gekommen, um diese Liebe zu vergeistigen, um auf der einen Seite die Liebe loszureissen von den Banden, in die sie durch die Blutsverwandtschaft hineinverschlungen wird, und auf der anderen Seite die Kraft, den Impuls zu der geistigen Liebe zu geben. Innerhalb der Bekenner des Alten Testamentes sehen wir im vollsten Sinne noch das ausgedrückt, was wir die Zugehörigkeit zur Gruppenseele als die Grundlage des einzelnen Ichs im Gesamt-Ich nennen können. Wir haben gesehen, der Ausspruch: «Ich und der Vater Abraham sind Eins» bedeutet etwas für den Bekenner des Alten Testaments; es bedeutet, sich geborgen zu fühlen in dem Bewußtsein, daß jenes Blut, welches schon geronnen hat in den Adern des Vaters Abraham, herunterrollte bis zu ihm, dem Bekenner. Da fühlte er sich in einem Ganzen geborgen; und nur diejenigen betrachtete man als zusammengehörig, welche aus einer solchen Art menschlicher Fortpflanzung hervorgegangen waren, die durch diese Blutsverwandtschaft aufrechterhalten blieb. Ganz im Anfange der Menschheitsentwickelung auf der Erde wurde überhaupt nur geheiratet in ganz engen Kreisen, in ganz blutsverwandten Familien. Die «Nah-Ehe» war das, woran man im Anfange der Menschheitsentwickelung festgehalten hat. Immer mehr erweiterten sich die engen Blutkreise. Man heiratete hinaus aus dem Stamm, aber noch nicht in ein anderes Volk hinüber. Das Volk des Alten Testamentes hielt ganz fest daran, daß die Volksblutsverwandtschaft aufrechterhalten wurde. Der ist ein «Jude», der dem Blute nach ein Jude ist.

[ 14 ] An dieses Prinzip wendet sich der Christus Jesus nicht; er wendet sich an diejenigen, die dieses Prinzip der bloßen Blutsverwandtschaft durchbrechen, und er zeigt das Wichtige, was er zu zeigen hat, daher nicht zuerst innerhalb Judäas, sondern draußen in Galiläa. Galiläa war das Gebiet, wo Völker aus allen möglichen Stämmen und Völkern gemischt waren. Der «Galiläer» bedeutet der «Mischling». Zu den Galiläern geht der Christus Jesus, zu denen, die am meisten gemischt sind. Und aus dem, was solcher durch Mischung bewirkten Fortpflanzung der Menschheit zugrunde liegt, soll das hervorgehen, was eben nicht mehr an die materielle Grundlage der Liebe gebunden ist. Daher wird das, was er zu sagen hat, auf einer Hochzeit gesagt. Warum gerade auf einer Hochzeit? Weil durch die Hochzeit hingedeutet werden kann auf die Fortpflanzung der Menschheit. Und das, was er zeigen will, zeigt er nicht da, wo man nur heiratet in engeren Grenzen, wo man nur heiratet innerhalb der Blutsbande, sondern da, wo man unabhängig von den Blutsbanden heiratet. Deshalb wird das bei einer Hochzeit gesagt, und zwar bei einer Hochzeit in Galiläa. Und wenn wir verstehen wollen, was hier gezeigt wird, dann müssen wir wiederum einen Blick werfen auf die ganze Entwickelung der Menschheit.

[ 15 ] Oft ist betont worden, daß es für den Okkultisten etwas Äußeres, bloß Materielles nicht gibt. Alles Materielle ist für ihn der Ausdruck eines Seelisch-Geistigen. Und wie Ihr Antlitz der Ausdruck für ein Seelisch-Geistiges ist, so ist das Licht der Sonne der Ausdruck für ein seelisch-geistiges Licht. Alles, was scheinbar bloß materiell geschieht, ist zu gleicher Zeit der Ausdruck tieferer geistiger Vorgänge. Der Okkultismus leugnet nicht das Materielle, ihm ist nur selbst das gröbste Materielle der Ausdruck eines Seelisch-Geistigen. So entsprechen den geistigen Entwickelungsvorgängen in der Welt immer parallel gehende materielle Tatsachen.

[ 16 ] Wenn wir im Geiste zurückblicken auf die Entwickelung der Menschheit, als die Menschheit noch auf dem alten Kontinente zwischen Europa und Amerika war, auf der alten Atlantis, von da aus hinüberlebte in die spätere nachatlantische Zeit, und wie verschiedene Generationen endlich bis zu uns herauf geführt haben, dann können wir den ganzen Sinn dieser Entwickelung der Menschheit von der vierten Rasse zur fünften Rasse — wenn wir ihn vom Rassenstandpunkt aus betrachten — so ins Auge fassen, daß sozusagen aus der noch ganz und gar in die Gruppenseele getauchten Menschheit der Atlantis allmählich sich entwickeln, langsam heranreifen sollte das Einzel-Ich der menschlichen Persönlichkeit in der nachatlantischen Zeit. Was der Christus geistig brachte durch seinen mächtigen geistigen Impuls, das mußte langsam auch durch andere Impulse vorbereitet werden. Was Jahve getan hat, war, daß er in den astralischen Leib das Gruppenseelen-Ich hineingelegt und ihn so vorbereitet hat zur langsamen Reifung, um aufzunehmen das völlig selbständige «Ich-bin». Nicht anders aber konnte dieses Ich-bin von dem Menschen erfaßt werden, als wenn auch sein physischer Leib ein geeignetes Werkzeug wurde, um dieses Ich-bin zu beherbergen. Sie können sich leicht vorstellen, daß der astralische Leib noch so fähig sein könnte, ein Ich aufzunehmen — wenn der physische Leib so ist, daß er kein geeignetes Werkzeug ist, um das «Ich-bin» auch wirklich im Wachbewußtsein zu fassen, dann ist es eben nicht möglich, ein «Ich-bin» aufzunehmen. Es muß auch der physische Leib immer das geeignete Werkzeug sein für das, was sich auf Erden hier ausprägt. Also mußte der physische Leib, als der astralische Leib herangereift war, vorbereitet sein, um ein Werkzeug für das. «Ich-bin» zu werden. Und das geschah auch in der menschlichen Entwickelung.

[ 17 ] Wir können die Prozesse verfolgen, durch welche der physische Leib vorbereitet wurde, ein Träger des selbstbewußten, des «Ich-bin »begabten Menschen zu werden. Sogar in der Bibel wird uns das angedeutet: daß derjenige, der Stammvater wird in einer gewissen Beziehung in der nachatlantischen Zeit, daß Noah der erste Weintrinker ist, als erster die Wirkung des Alkohols erlebt. Da kommen wir auf ein Kapitel, das wirklich für manchen schockierend sein kann. Was in der nachatlantischen Zeit als ein besonderer Kultus hervortritt, ist der Dionysosdienst. Sie wissen alle, wie der Dionysoskult in Zusammenhang gebracht wird mit dem Wein. Dieser merkwürdige Stoff wird der Menschheit allerdings erst in der nachatlantischen Zeit zugeführt, und dieser Stoff wirkt auf die Menschheit. Sie wissen, jeder Stoff wirkt irgendwie auf die Menschen, und der Alkohol hat eine ganz bestimmte Wirkung auf den menschlichen Organismus. Er hatte nämlich eine Mission im Laufe der Menschheitsentwickelung; er hatte — so sonderbar das erscheint — die Aufgabe, sozusagen den menschlichen Leib so zu präparieren, daß dieser abgeschnitten wurde von dem Zusammenhang mit dem Göttlichen, damit das persönliche «Ich-bin» herauskommen konnte. Der Alkohol hat nämlich die Wirkung, daß er den Menschen abschneidet von dem Zusammenhang mit der geistigen Welt, in der der Mensch früher war. Diese Wirkung hat det Alkohol auch noch heute. Der Alkohol ist nicht umsonst in der Menschheit gewesen. Man wird in einer zukünftigen Menschheit im vollsten Sinne des Wortes sagen können, daß der Alkohol die Aufgabe hatte, den Menschen so weit in die Materie herunterzuziehen, damit der Mensch egoistisch wurde, und daß der Alkohol ihn dahin brachte, das Ich für sich zu beanspruchen und es nicht mehr in den Dienst des ganzen Volkes zu stellen. Also den entgegengesetzten Dienst, den die Gruppenseele der Menschheit geleistet hat, hat der Alkohol geleistet. Er hat den Menschen die Fähigkeit genommen, in höheren Welten sich mit einem Ganzen eins zu fühlen. Daher der Dionysoskult, der das Zusammenleben in einer Art äußeren Rausches pflegt. Ein Aufgehen in einem Ganzen, ohne zu schauen dieses Ganze. Die Entwickelung in der nachatlantischen Zeit ist deshalb mit dem Dionysoskult verbunden worden, weil dieser Kult ein Symbolum war für die Funktion und Mission des Alkohols. Jetzt, wo die Menschheit wiederum strebt, den Weg zurückzufinden, wo das Ich so weit entwickelt ist, daß der Mensch wieder den Anschluß finden kann an die göttlich-geistigen Mächte, jetzt ist die Zeit gekommen, wo, anfangs sogar aus dem Unbewußten heraus, eine gewisse Reaktion gegen den Alkohol eintritt. Diese Reaktion tritt aus dem Grunde ein, weil viele Menschen heute schon fühlen, daß so etwas, was einmal eine besondere Bedeutung hatte, nicht ewig berechtigt ist.

[ 18 ] Es braucht niemand das, was jetzt gesagt worden ist über die Aufgabe des Alkohols in einer bestimmten Zeit, etwa als für den Alkohol gesprochen aufzufassen; sondern es geschah, um klarzumachen, daß diese Mission des Alkohols erfüllt ist und daß für die verschiedenen Zeiten sich eben Verschiedenes schickt. Aber es tauchte auch in derselben Epoche, wo die Menschheit durch den Alkohol am tiefsten in den Egoismus heruntergezogen worden ist, die stärkste Kraft auf, die dem Menschen den größten Impuls geben kann, um wieder den Zusammenschluß mit dem geistigen Ganzen zu finden. Auf der einen Seite mußte der Mensch bis zur tiefsten Stufe hinuntersteigen, um selbständig zu werden, auf der anderen Seite mußte dagegen die starke Kraft kommen, die wieder den Impuls geben konnte, um den Weg zum Ganzen zurückzufinden.

[ 19 ] Dies mußte der Christus andeuten in dem ersten Zeichen für seine Mission. Er mußte erstens andeuten, daß das Ich selbständig werden sollte, und sodann, daß er sich an diejenigen wendet, die sich schon losgelöst haben von den Blutszusammenhängen. Er mußte sich wenden an eine solche Hochzeit, wo die Körper unter dem Einfluß des Alkohols standen; denn bei dieser Hochzeit wird Wein getrunken. Und der Christus Jesus zeigt, wie er es hält mit seiner Mission in bezug auf die verschiedenen Erdperioden. Wie oft wird es ganz sonderbar ausgedrückt, was die Verwandlung des Wassers in Wein hier für eine Bedeutung habe. Auch sogar von Kanzeln kann man es hören, daß damit nichts anderes gemeint sei, als daß das schale Wasser des Alten Teestamentes abgelöst werden solle von dem kräftigen Wein des Neuen Testamentes. Es waren vermutlich Weinliebhaber, die diese Art der Auslegung immer wieder geliebt haben. Denn so einfach sind diese Symbole nicht. Es muß festgehalten werden, daß der Christus sagt: Meine Mission ist eine solche, daß sie in eine fernste Zukunft hinweist; und es soll den Menschen als selbständigen Menschen gebracht werden der Zusammenhang mit der Gottheit, die Liebe zur Gottheit als eine freie Gabe des selbständigen Ich. Diese Liebe soll den Menschen in Freiheit an die Gottheit binden, wie ihn früher ein innerlicher Zwangsimpuls der Gruppenseele dieser Gottheit eingegliedert hatte.

[ 20 ] Fassen wir jetzt im Sinne einer Stimmung auf, was so die Menschheit erlebte. Fassen wir vor allem die Gedanken, die man damals hatte. Man sagte: Der Mensch war einst mit der Gruppenseele verbunden und fühlte seinen Zusammenhang mit der Gottheit. Dann hat er sich herunterentwickelt. Das betrachtete man wie ein Verstricktwerden mit dem Materiellen, wie eine Degeneration, wie eine Art Abfall von dem Göttlichen, und man fragte: Woher ist denn das, was der Mensch jetzt hat, ursprünglich gekommen? Wovon ist er abgefallen? Je weiter wir in der Erdenentwickelung zurückgehen, desto mehr finden wir, daß die festen Stoffe immer mehr unter dem Einfluß von wärmeren Zuständen in Flüssiges übergehen. Wir wissen aber, daß damals, als die Erde noch ein flüssiger Planet war, der Mensch auch schon vorhanden war. Aber damals war der Mensch auch noch weniger von der Gottheit losgelöst als später. In demselben Maße, als sich die Erde verfestigte, vermaterialisierte sich auch der Mensch. Der Mensch war, als die Erde flüssig war, schon im Wasser enthalten; aber er konnte nur herumgehen auf einer Erde, die auch schon Festes abgesetzt hatte. Daher fühlte man das Sichverfestigen des Menschen so, daß man sagte: Aus der Erde, die noch Wasser war, wird der Mensch herausgeboren, aber da ist er noch ganz mit der Gottheit verbunden. Alles, was ihn in die Materie hineingebracht hat, hat ihn verunreinigt. Diejenigen, die sich dieses alten Zusammenhanges mit dem Göttlichen erinnern sollten, wurden mit der Wassertaufe getauft. Diese sollte das Symbolum dafür sein: Werdet euch bewußt eures alten Zusammenhanges mit der Gottheit, und daß ihr verunreinigt seid, heruntergekommen seid zu dem heutigen Zustand! - So taufte auch der Täufer, um auf diese Weise den Menschen den Zusammenhang mit der Gottheit nahezubringen. Und so war alle Taufe in den alten Zeiten gemeint. Es ist ein radikaler Ausdruck, aber ein Ausdruck, der uns das, was gemeint ist, zum Bewußtsein bringt.

[ 21 ] Der Christus Jesus sollte mit etwas anderem taufen. Er sollte die Menschen nicht auf die Vergangenheit weisen, sondern durch die Entwickelung der Geistigkeit in ihrem Innern auf die Zukunft. Durch den «heiligen», durch den ungetrübten Geist sollte des Menschen Geistiges zusammenhängend werden mit der Gottheit. Die Wassertaufe war eine Erinnerungstaufe. Die Taufe aber mit dem «heiligen Geist» ist eine prophetische Taufe, die hinweist in die Zukunft. Jener Zusammenhang, der ganz verlorengegangen ist, an den erinnern sollte die Wassertaufe, ist mit verlorengegangen auch in dem, was ausgedrückt wurde im Symbolum des Weines, des Opferweines. Dionysos ist der zerstückelte Gott, der in die einzelnen Seelen eingezogen ist, so daß die einzelnen Teile nichts mehr voneinander wußten. In viele Stücke zersplittert, in die Materie geworfen ist der Mensch durch das, was durch den Alkohol - das Symbol für Dionysos - der Menschheit gebracht worden ist. Aber in der Hochzeit von Kana ist ein großes Prinzip festgehalten. Das ist das pädagogische Evolutionsprinzip. Es gibt zwar absolute Wahrheiten, aber sie können der Menschheit nicht ohne weiteres zu jeder Zeit überliefert werden. Jede Zeit muß ihre besonderen Verrichtungen, ihre besonderen Wahrheiten haben.

[ 22 ] Warum dürfen wir heute über Reinkarnation und so weiter sprechen? Warum dürfen wir in einer solchen Versammlung zusammensitzen und Geisteswissenschaft pflegen? Wir dürfen das, weil alle die Seelen, die heute in Ihnen sind, in so und so vielen Körpern so und so oft auf der Erde inkarniert waren. Gar manche von den Seelen, die heute in Ihnen sind, haben einstmals gelebt innerhalb der germanischen Länder, wo die Druidenpriester unter sie getreten sind und das, was geistige Weisheit ist, in Form von Mythen und Sagen an die Seele herangebracht haben. Und weil die Seele das dazumal in jener Form aufgenommen hat, ist sie heute in der Lage, das in einer anderen Form, in anthroposophischer Form aufzunehmen. Damals im Bilde, heute in der Form der Anthroposophie. Aber nicht hätte damals die Wahrheit in der heutigen Form vorgetragen werden können. Sie dürfen nicht glauben, daß der alte Druidenpriester die Wahrheit hätte in dieser Form verkünden können, wie es heute geschieht. Aber Anthroposophie ist diejenige Form, die für die heutigen oder unmittelbar kommenden Menschen taugt. In späteren Inkarnationen wird in ganz anderen Formen die Wahrheit verkündet und für sie gewirkt werden, und das, was man heute Anthroposophie nennt, wird als eine Erinnerung erzählt werden, wie man heute die Sagen und Märchen erzählt. So unsinnig darf der Anthroposoph nicht sein, zu sagen: Es hat in alten Zeiten nur Dummheiten und kindliche Anschauungen gegeben, und «nur wir haben es heute so herrlich weit gebracht». — Das tun zum Beispiel diejenigen, die vorgeben, Monisten zu sein. Wir aber arbeiten in der Geisteswissenschaft, um die nächste Epoche vorzubereiten. Denn würde unsere Epoche nicht da sein, so würde die nächste eben auch nicht kommen. Aber auch keiner darf die Gegenwart mit der Zukunft entschuldigen. Auch mit der Reinkarnationslehre wird da viel Unfug getrieben. Es sind mir Menschen vorgekommen, die gesagt haben, sie brauchten in ihrer heutigen Inkarnation noch keine anständigen Menschen zu sein, dafür hätten sie noch später Zeit. Wenn man aber heute damit nicht beginnt, dann wird die Folge davon gerade in der nächsten Inkarnation eintreten.

[ 23 ] So müssen wir uns klar sein, daß es etwas Absolutes in den Formen der Wahrheit nicht gibt, sondern daß jedesmal das erkannt wird, was einer gewissen Epoche der Menschheit entspricht. Es mußte sozusagen der höchste Impuls heruntersteigen bis zu den Lebensgewohnheiten der damaligen Zeit. Denn er mußte das, was höchste Wahrheit ist, in die Worte und die Verrichtungen kleiden, welche dem Verständnis der betreffenden Epoche angemessen waren. So mußte der Christus durch eine Art Dionysos- oder Weinopfer sagen, wie die Menschheit sich zur Gottheit erheben solle. Man darf nicht zelotisch sagen: Warum verwandelt Christus das Wasser in Wein? Es muß die Zeit berücksichtigt werden. Durch eine Art Dionysosopfer mußte Christus vorbereiten das, was kommen sollte. Christus geht zu den Galiläern, die zusammengewürfelt sind aus allerlei Nationen, die nicht durch Blutsbande verknüpft sind, und tut da das erste Zeichen seiner Mission; und er schickt sich so weit in ihre Lebensgewohnheiten, daß er ihnen das Wasser in Wein verwandelt.

[ 24 ] Halten wir fest, was der Christus da eigentlich sagen will: Ich will auch diejenigen Menschen zu einem geistigen Zusammenhange führen, die herabgestiegen sind bis zu der Stufe von Materialität, welche durch das Weintrinken symbolisiert wird. Und er will nicht nur für solche da sein, die durch das Symbol der Wassertaufe sich erheben können. Es ist sehr bedeutsam, daß wir geradezu darauf hingewiesen werden, daß hier sechs Reinigungskrüge stehen (2, 6). Auf die Zahl kommen wir noch einmal zurück. «Reinigung » ist das, was durch die Taufe bewirkt wird. Man sprach in den Zeiten, aus denen das Evangelium herstammt, wenn man die Tatsache des Taufens ausdrückte, vom «Taufen» als von einer Reinigung. Man sprach aber niemals eigentlich das Wort «Taufe» aus, sondern sagte «taufen»; und das, was bewirkt wurde durch die Taufe, nannte man die «Reinigung». Niemals werden Sie in dem Johannes-Evangelium das entsprechende Wort, also AurriSewv, anders als in Form des Zeitwortes finden. Wenn es aber als Hauptwort gebraucht wird, wird immer die Reinigung, die Wirkung ausgedrückt, damit sich der Mensch an seinen Reinigungszustand erinnern soll, an seinen Zusammenhang mit der Gottheit. Also selbst in den symbolischen Krügen für das Reinigungsopfer nimmt der Christus Jesus das Zeichen vor, durch das er - der Zeitepoche entsprechend — auf seine Mission hinweist.

[ 25 ] So wird uns gerade etwas von der tiefsten Mission des Christus in der Hochzeit zu Kana in Galiläa ausgedrückt. Und da mußte er sagen: Es wird meine Zeit kommen in der Zukunft; jetzt aber ist sie noch nicht da. Was ich hier zu wirken habe, hängt zum Teil noch mit dem zusammen, was überwunden werden muß durch meine Mission. Er steht in der Gegenwart und weist zugleich in die Zukunft hinein und zeigt dadurch, wie er nicht im absoluten, sondern im kulturpädagogischen Sinne für die Zeit wirkt. Die Mutter ist es daher, die ihn auffordert und sagt: «Sie haben nicht Wein.» Er aber sagt: Das, was ich jetzt zu vollbringen habe, hängt noch mit den alten Zeiten zusammen, mit «mir und dir»; denn meine eigentliche Zeit,wo der Wein zurückverwandelt wird in Wasser, ist noch nicht gekommen. Wie hätte es auch überhaupt einen Sinn, zu sagen: «Weib, was habe ich mit dir zu schaflen?», wenn er dann doch das befolgt, was die Mutter gesagt hat?! Es hat nur dann einen Sinn, wenn wir darauf hingewiesen ‚werden sollen, daß durch die Blutsverwandtschaft der gegenwärtige Zustand der Menschheit herbeigeführt worden ist, und daß ein Zeichen gegeben wird im Sinne der alten Gebräuche, die noch des Einschlages des Alkohols bedürfen, um hinzudeuten auf die Zeit, da aus den Blutsbanden das selbständige Ich sich herausgestaltet, daß man also vorläufig mit dem Alten, das im Wein symbolisiert wird, noch rechnen muß, daß aber eine spätere Zeit kommen wird, die «seine Zeit» sein wird.

[ 26 ] Und Kapitel für Kapitel wird uns jetzt im Johannes-Evangelium ein Zweifaches gezeigt: erstens, daß das, was mitgeteilt wird, für diejenigen mitgeteilt wird, die in einer gewissen Weise okkulte Wahrheiten zu begreifen vermögen. Heute wird ja exoterisch Geisteswissenschaft vorgetragen, damals aber konnten geisteswissenschaftliche Wahrheiten nur diejenigen verstehen, die in einer gewissen Weise bis zu diesem oder jenem Grade wirklich eingeweiht waren. Wer konnte etwas von dem verstehen, was an tieferen Tatsachen der Christus Jesus zu sagen hatte? Derjenige nur konnte es verstehen, welcher vermochte, außerhalb des Leibes wahrzunehmen, wer heraustreten aus dem Leibe und in der geistigen Welt bewußt werden konnte. Wollte der Christus Jesus zu Menschen reden, die ihn verstehen konnten, so mußten es solche sein, die eingeweiht waren in einer gewissen Weise, die schon in einer gewissen Weise geistig sehen konnten. Wenn er zum Beispiel spricht von der Wiedergeburt der Seele in dem Kapitel über das Gespräch mit Nikodemus; da wird uns gezeigt, daß er diese Wahrheit einem solchen verkündet, der mit geistigen Sinnen sieht. Sie brauchen nur zu lesen:

«Es war aber ein Mensch unter den Pharisäern, mit Namen Nikodemus, ein Oberster unter den Juden;
der kam zu Jesu bei der Nacht...» (3, 1-2)

[ 27 ] Gewöhnen wir uns nur daran, die Worte auf die Goldwaage zu legen! Es wird uns angedeutet, daß Nikodemus zu Jesu «bei der Nacht» kommt, das heißt, daß er außerhalb des physischen Leibes dasjenige aufnimmt, was ihm da der Christus Jesus mitzuteilen hat. «Bei der Nacht», -das heißt, indem er sich seiner geistigen Sinne bedient, kommt er zu dem Christus Jesus. So wie Nathanael und der Christus Jesus sich als Eingeweihte verständigen durch die Rede vom Feigenbaum, so wird auch hier eine Verständigungsfähigkeit angedeutet.

[ 28 ] Und das andere, was uns gezeigt wird, ist, daß der Christus immer eine Mission erfüllen will, die absieht von den bloßen Blutsbanden. Es wird uns das ganz deutlich gezeigt dadurch, daß er hingeht zu der Samariterin am Brunnen. Er gibt ihr die Unterweisung, die er denen geben will, deren Ich herausgehoben ist aus der Blutsgemeinschaft.

«Da kam er in eine Stadt Samarias, die heißet Sichar, nahe bei dem Feld, das Jakob seinem Sohne Joseph gab.
Es war aber daselbst Jakobs Brunnen. Da nun Jesus müde war. von der Reise, setzte er sich also auf den Brunnen; und es war um die sechste Stunde.
Da kommt ein Weib aus Samaria, Wasser zu schöpfen. Jesus spricht zu ihr: Gib mir zu trinken.
Denn seine Jünger waren in die Stadt gegangen, daß sie Speise kauften.
Spricht nun das samaritische Weib zu ihm: Wie bittest du von mir zu trinken, so du ein Jude bist und ich ein samaritisch Weib? (Denn die Juden hatten keine Gemeinschaft mit den Samaritern).» (4, 5-9)

[ 29 ] Darauf wird hingewiesen, daß es etwas Besonderes ist, daß der Christus zu einem Volke geht, dessen Iche aus der Gruppenseele herausgehoben, entwurzelt sind. Das ist das Wichtige, worauf es ankommt.

[ 30 ] Aus der Erzählung von dem Königischen ergibt sich weiter: Nicht nur das, was sich durch die Blutsbande zusammenschließt in Volksheiraten, sondern auch das, was nach Blutsbanden sich in Stände sondert, durchbricht der Christus. Zu denen kommt er, deren Ich sozusagen entwurzelt ist: Er heilt den Sohn des Königischen, der ihm eigentlich nach Auffassung der Juden fremd ist. Überall werden Sie darauf hingewiesen, daß Christus der Missionar ist von dem selbständigen Ich, das sich in jeder Menschenindividualität findet. Daher darf er auch sagen: Ich spreche, wenn ich von mir spreche, in höherem Sinne gar nicht von meinem in mir darin sitzenden Ich, sondern wenn ich von dem «Ich-bin» spreche, so spreche ich von einer Wesenheit, von etwas, was jeder in sich findet. Mein Ich ist eins mit dem Vater; aber das Ich überhaupt, das in jeder Persönlichkeit ist, ist eins mit dem Vater. — Das ist auch der tiefere Sinn der Unterweisung, die der Christus der Samariterin am Brunnen gibt. Ich möchte Sie vor allem an ein Wort erinnern, das Ihnen ein tiefes Verständnis eröffnen kann, wenn Sie es richtig verstehen: die Stelle des 31.bis 34. Verses im 3.Kapitel, die natürlich so gelesen werden muß, daß man sich bewußt ist, Johannes der Täufer sagt diese Worte:

«Der von oben herkommt, ist über alle. Wer von der Erde ist, der ist von der Erde und redet von der Erde. Der vom Himmel kommt, der ist über alle und zeuget, was er gesehen und gehöret hat; und sein Zeugnis nimmt niemand an.
Wer es aber annimmt, der besiegelt es, daß Gott wahrhaftig sei. Denn welchen Gott gesandt hat, der redet Gottesworte; denn Gott gibt den Geist nicht nach dem Maß.»

[ 31 ] Ich möchte einmal den Menschen kennenlernen, der diese Worte nach dieser Übersetzung wirklich versteht. Was ist das für ein Gegensatz: «Der von Gott kommt, redet Gottesworte, denn Gott gibt den Geist nicht nach dem Maß!» Was ist der Sinn dieser Sätze?

[ 32 ] Durch unzählige Reden will Christus sagen: Wenn ich von dem Ich spreche, so spreche ich von dem ewigen Ich im Menschen, das eins ist mit dem geistigen Urgrund der Welt. Wenn ich von diesem Ich spreche, spreche ich von etwas, was im Allerinnersten der Menschenseele wohnt. Hört mich jemand an — und jetzt redet er nur vom niederen Ich, das von dem Ewigen nichts fühlt -, der nimmt mein Zeugnis nicht an, der versteht mich gar nicht. Denn ich kann nicht von etwas sprechen, das von mir zu ihm hinüberfließt. Dann wäre er nicht selbständig. Jeder muß den Gott, den ich verkünde, in sich selbst als seinen ewigen Grund finden. - Nur ein paar Verse zurück finden Sie die Stelle:

«Johannes aber taufte auch noch zu Enon, nahe bei Salim, denn es war viel Wassers daselbst; und sie kamen dahin und ließen sich taufen.
Denn Johannes war noch nicht ins Gefängnis gelegt.
Da erhub sich eine Frage unter den Jüngern des Johannes mit den Juden über die Reinigung» (3, 23-25),

[ 33 ] das heißt über die Form der Taufe. Wenn man eine solche Frage in diesem Kreise erhob, sprach man immer vom Zusammenhange mit dem Göttlichen und von dem Untertauchen des Menschen in die Materie, und wie man nach der alten Gottesidee mit dem Göttlichen durch die Gruppenseele verbunden war. Da kamen die anderen und sagten zu Johannes: Der Jesus tauft aber auch! Und da muß ihnen Johannes erst klarmachen, daß das, was durch den Jesus in die Welt kommt, etwas ganz Besonderes ist. Und er macht es ihnen klar dadurch, daß er sagt: Der Jesus lehrt nicht jenen Zusammenhang, der durch die alte Taufe symbolisiert wird, sondern er lehrt, wie der Mensch durch die freie Gabe des selbständig gewordenen Ichs selbst geführt wird; und jeder muß in sich selbst das «Ich-bin», den Gott, entdecken, nur dadurch kommt er in die Lage, das Göttliche in sich zu finden. - Wenn diese Worte so gelesen werden, dann wird der Zuhörer gewahr, daß Er selbst, daß das «Ich-bin» von Gott gesandt ist. Ein solcher, der von Gott gesandt ist, der entsendet wird zum Entzünden des «Gottes» in dieser Art, der verkündet auch den Gott in dem wahren Sinne, nicht mehr nach der Blutsverwandtschaft.

[ 34 ] Und jetzt übersetzen wir uns diese Stelle, wie sie wirklich heißt. Wir bekommen die Materialien dazu, wenn wir uns klar sind, wie die Lehren der Alten waren. Die waren in vielen Büchern kunstvoll aufgeschrieben. Wir brauchen uns nur an die Psalmen zu erinnern, wo in schön gefügten Reden im Alten Testamente das Göttliche verkündet worden ist. Da redet man nur von den alten Blutzusammenhängen als dem Zusammenhange mit einem Gotte. Man konnte alles das lernen, aber man lernte durch alles das nie mehr, als daß man mit dieser alten Gottheit zusammenhängt. Wollte man aber den Christus verstehen, so brauchte man all die alten Gesetze, alle die alten Künstlichkeiten nicht. Was der Christus lehrte, konnte man in dem Maße ergreifen, als man in sich das geistige Ich erfaßte. Dann konnte man zwar noch kein volles Wissen von der Gottheit haben, aber man konnte das verstehen, was man von den Lippen des Christus Jesus hörte. Dann hatte man die Vorbedingung zum Verständnis. Man brauchte dann alle Psalmen nicht, alle kunstvoll gefügten Lehren nicht, sondern man brauchte nur das Einfachste, und das waren lallende Ausdrücke. Man braucht nur zu lallen in seinen Worten, und man wird von dem Gotte zeugen. Das konnte man selbst in den einfachsten lallenden Worten, es brauchten nur einzelne Worte zu sein, die gar kein «Maß» haben. Wer nur lallte, wer fühlte in seinem Ich, daß er von Gott gesandt ist, der konnte das verstehen, was der Christus sprach. Wer nur den irdischen Zusammenhang mit Gott weiß, der redet im Versmaß der Psalmen, aber all sein Metrum führt ihn zu nichts anderem als zu den alten Göttern. Derjenige aber, der sich in den geistigen Welten gegründet fühlt, der ist über alle, und er kann Zeugnis geben von dem, was er gesehen und gehört hat in den geistigen Welten. Aber sein Zeugnis nehmen diejenigen, die nur in der gewohnten Weise ein Zeugnis annehmen, nicht an. Wenn es solche gibt, die es annehmen, dann zeigen sie eben durch ihre Annahme, daß sie als gottgesandt sich fühlen. Sie glauben nicht nur, sie verstehen, was ihnen der andere sagt, und sie besiegeln durch ihr Verstehen selbst ihre Worte. «Wer das Ich fühlt, offenbart selbst im Lallen Gottes Worte.» Das bedeutet es. Denn der Geist, der hier gemeint ist, braucht sich durch kein Metrum, durch kein Silbenmaß auszusprechen; sondern in der einfachsten lallenden Weise kann er sich ausdrücken. Es werden leicht solche Worte als Freibrief genommen für ein Recht auf Unweisheit. Wer aber die Weisheit ablehnt, weil sich nach seiner Meinung die höchsten Geheimnisse in der schlichtesten Form aussprechen lassen müssen, der tut dies - allerdings oft unbewußt nur aus einem gewissen Hang zur seelischen Bequemlichkeit. Wenn gesagt wird: «Gott gibt den Geist nicht nach dem Maß», so ist eben nur gemeint, daß das Maß nicht zum Geist verhilft; wo aber der Geist wirklich ist, da entsteht auch das Maß. Nicht ein jeder, der das Maß hat, hat den Geist; wer aber den Geist hat, kommt gewiß zum Maß. Man darf natürlich gewisse Dinge nicht umkehren: Es ist nicht schon ein Zeichen für das Geisthaben, wenn man #ein Maß hat, obschon auch umgekehrt das Maßhaben nicht ein Zeichen für den Geist ist. Wissenschaft ist sicherlich kein Zeichen für Weisheit, aber Unwissenheit sicherlich auch nicht.

[ 35 ] So wird uns also gezeigt, daß der Christus an das selbständig gewordene Ich in jeder Menschenseele appelliert. «Maß» müssen Sie hier ähnlich nehmen wie «Silbenmaß», wie kunstvoll aufgebaute Sprache. - Und der vorhergehende Satz heißt wörtlich: «Der, der Gott im «Ich-bin» erfaßt, bezeugt selbst im Lallen göttliche oder Gottes Sprache und findet den Weg zum Gotte.»

Fifth Lecture

[ 1 ] In our considerations of the Gospel of John, we must never lose sight of the fundamental point we made yesterday, namely, that we are dealing with the original author of the Gospel of John, who was the favorite disciple of Christ Jesus himself. Someone might now ask: Yes, quite apart from the occult knowledge, is there perhaps any external testimony that the author of the Gospel of John can be said to have come to the higher kind of knowledge about the Christ through the resurrection, through the initiation that is depicted in the so-called miracle of Lazarus? If you read the Gospel of John carefully, you will notice something. You will notice that nowhere in the Gospel of John, and also nowhere before that chapter which deals with the resurrection of Lazarus, is there any mention of the disciple “whom the Lord loved” (13, 23) is not mentioned; that is, the actual author of the Gospel of John wants to say: What comes before does not yet come from the knowledge that I have gained through initiation; in this you must still disregard me for the time being. Only later does he mention the disciple “whom the Lord loved”. Thus the Gospel of John falls into two important parts: the first part, where the disciple whom the Lord loved is not yet mentioned because he had not yet been initiated; and only after the resurrection of Lazarus is this disciple mentioned. Nowhere in the document itself will you find a contradiction to what was stated in the last lectures. Of course, a person who only looks at the Gospel superficially will easily overlook it and not pay attention to it. And today, when everything is being popularized and all kinds of wisdom is reaching people, we have to experience the peculiar spectacle that there is often really quite a lot of doubt among this wisdom.

[ 2 ] Who would not consider it a blessing that such cheap literature as the “Reclamsche Universal-Bibliothek” brings all kinds of knowledge to the people? Now among the latest booklets, one has appeared about 'The Genesis of the Bible'. The author calls himself on the title page a Doctor of Theology, so he is a theologian. He believes that the author of the Gospel of John is actually referred to throughout all the chapters of the Gospel of John, from the 35th verse in the first chapter. When I came across this booklet, I really couldn't believe my eyes and said to myself: There must be something very strange here that goes against all previous occult views - that the favorite disciple is not mentioned before the resurrection of Lazarus. But a theologian should know! Well, in order not to judge too quickly, take the Gospel of John in your hand and see what it says: “On the morrow John stood again, and two of his disciples” (1:35). John the Baptist is mentioned, and two of his disciples are spoken of. The most favorable thing that can be assumed for this theologian is that his consciousness is filled with an old exoteric tradition that says that one of the two disciples is John. This tradition is based on Matthew 4:21. But one should not explain the Gospel of John by means of the other gospels. So a theologian has managed to introduce a directly harmful book into popular literature; and when one knows how much is further absorbed by what is introduced to the people in this way through such cheap literature, then one can measure the damage that arises from it. This should only be an interim remark, so that a certain protective wall can be erected against all sorts of objections that could be raised against what is being said here.

[ 3 ] Now let us consider that what precedes the resurrection of Lazarus is indeed the announcement of very powerful things, but that the author has reserved the very deepest things for the chapters following the resurrection of Lazarus. Nevertheless, he wanted to point out everywhere that the content of his gospel is something that only those who have been initiated to a certain degree know about. Therefore, he indicates in various places that the things that are communicated in the first chapters have to do with a kind of initiation to a certain degree. There are initiations of different degrees. In a certain form of Oriental initiation, for example, seven degrees of initiation are distinguished, and these seven degrees of initiation are given all kinds of symbolic names. The first degree was the degree of the “Raven”, the second that of the “Occult”, the third that of the “Warrior”, the fourth that of the “Lion”. The fifth degree is now designated by the name of the people among the various peoples who still felt a kind of blood relationship as the expression of their group soul; thus, for example, among the Persians, an initiate in the fifth degree is only called a “Persian” in the occult sense. If we realize what these names mean, the justification of these designations will soon appear to us.

[ 4 ] A first-degree initiate is one who forms the link between the occult and the outer life, who is sent back and forth. In the first stage, the human being must still devote himself completely to the outer life, but he must carry what he has discovered into the places of initiation. Ravens are spoken of where words have to convey something from the outside in. Do you remember the ravens of Elijah or of Wotan, even the ravens in the saga of Barbarossa, where they were to find out whether it was time to emerge. The initiate of the second degree was already fully immersed in the occult life. One who had reached the third degree was allowed to advocate for the occult; the degree of the “champion” does not mean a person who fights, but one who is allowed to advocate for the occult teachings, for what the occult life is able to give. The one who is a “lion” is one who realizes the occult life within himself, so that he may not only advocate for the occult with words, but also with deeds, that is, with a kind of magical action. The sixth degree is the degree of the “solar hero,” and the seventh degree is the degree of the “father.” For us, the fifth degree is relevant.

[ 5 ] Man, especially in ancient times, stood within his community and therefore, when he felt his ego, he also felt more as a member of a group soul. But anyone who was an initiate of the fifth degree had made a certain sacrifice, had stripped away his personality to such an extent that he incorporated the essence of the people into his personality. Just as the other person felt his soul in the soul of the people, so he had taken in the soul of the people, because everything that was personality was of no concern to him, only the general spirit of the people. That is why such an initiate was given the name of the people in question. Now we know that in the Gospel of John we are told that among the first disciples of Christ Jesus is Nathanael. He is presented to the Christ. He is not so highly initiated that he is able to see through the Christ. The Christ is, of course, the spirit of all-embracing knowledge, who cannot be seen through by a Nathanael, an initiate in the fifth degree. But the Christ sees through Nathanael. This is shown by two facts. How does he himself describe him?

“This is a true Israelite!” (1, 47)

[ 6 ] There you have the designation according to the name of the people. Just as among the Persians an initiate of the fifth degree was called a “Persian,” so among the Israelites such a person was called an “Israelite.” That is why Christ calls Nathanael an “Israelite.” And then He says to him:

“Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you!” (1, 48)

[ 7 ] This is a symbolic term for an initiate, just like Buddha sitting under the bodhi tree. The fig tree is a symbol of the Egyptian-Chaldean initiation. He wants to tell him: Oh, I know very well that you are an initiate in a certain sense and can see through certain things, because I saw you. And now Nathaniel recognizes him:

“Nathaniel answered and said unto him, ‘Master, thou art the Son of God, and the King of Israel’.” (1:49)

[ 8 ] The word “king” in this context means: You are higher than I, because otherwise you could not say, “As you were sitting under the fig tree, I saw you.” And the Christ answers:

“You believe me because I have told you that I saw you under the fig tree; you will see greater things than that.” (1:50)

[ 9 ] We will have to discuss the words “verily, verily” later. Then he says:

“I tell you the truth, you will see the angels of heaven descending on the Son of Man and rising up again!” (1:51)

[ 10 ] Those who are able to recognize Christ will see even greater things than they have already seen. What is this significant word again?

[ 11 ] To explain it, let us remember what man actually is. We have said that man is different by day and by night. During the day, the four members of man: physical body, etheric body, astral body and I, are in a firm connection with each other. They act on each other. We may say that when a person is awake during the day, his physical body and etheric body are in a certain way permeated and nourished by his astral-spiritual and his ego-spiritual. But we have also shown how something else must be active in the etheric-physical and physical-physical bodies for the human being to be able to exist at all in his present phase of development. For we have reflected on the fact that every night man withdraws that which itself supplies his physical body and his etheric body, namely his astral body and I, and thus leaves his physical body and etheric body to their own fate throughout the night. Every night you all leave your physical body and your ether body unfaithfully. From this you will recognize that spiritual science points out with a certain right that divine spiritual powers and forces flow through this physical body, this ether body, during the night, so that your physical body and ether body are, so to speak, connected to the divine spiritual powers and beings. We have also pointed out that, in ancient times, when the astral body and the I were outside the physical body and etheric body in the times we called the Jahve or Jehovah times, Jehovah worked by inspiration. But the true light, the fullness of the Godhead or the Elohim, the Pleroma, is what always radiates through the physical body and the etheric body; only the human being cannot recognize it because, after all, he has not yet received the necessary impulse from the Christ principle before the appearance of this principle on earth. The principles that are to find expression in the physical body reside in the higher spiritual realm, in Devachan. The spiritual beings and powers that have an effect on the physical body are at home in the higher celestial spheres, in the higher Devachan; and the powers that have an effect on the etheric body are at home in the lower celestial spheres. Thus we can say: Entities from the highest regions of Devachan are constantly acting on this physical body, and entities from the lower regions of Devachan are constantly acting on the etheric body. A person can only recognize them when he absorbs the impulses of Christ within himself: Learn to truly recognize the Son of Man, then you will recognize how the spiritual forces in man ascend and descend from the heavenly spheres. This will become known to you through the impulse that the Christ gives to the earth!

[ 12 ] Yesterday already pointed to what follows now. It is the wedding at Cana of Galilee, which is often also called “the first of the miracles”, but it would be better to say “the first of the signs” that Christ Jesus performs (2:1-11). In order to understand the significance of this, we have to summarize much of what we have heard in the last lectures.

[ 13 ] First of all, there is talk of a wedding here. But why a wedding in Galilee? We will understand why it is a wedding in Galilee when we recall the whole mission of Christ once more. His mission consists of bringing the full power of the I, the inner independence, into the soul. The individual ego should feel itself in complete independence and seclusion, in complete standing-in-oneself, and through love, given as a free gift, human being should be brought together with human being. So love should come into the earthly mission through the Christ principle, which is more and more exalted above the material and more and more ascending into the spiritual. Love started out in its lowest form, bound to sensuality. In the original times of mankind, people loved each other through the bonds of blood, and it was considered extremely important that love have this material basis of blood relationship. The Christ had come to spiritualize this love, to, on the one hand, tear love away from the bonds in which it is entangled through blood relationship, and, on the other hand, to give the strength, the impulse to spiritual love. In the Old Testament believers we see expressed in the fullest sense that which we can call the belonging to the group soul as the foundation of the individual ego in the collective ego. We have seen that the saying, “I and my Father Abraham are one,” means something for the Old Testament believer; it means feeling secure in the knowledge that the blood that had already coagulated in the veins of Father Abraham rolled down to him, the believer. He felt secure in a whole; and only those who had emerged from such a kind of human reproduction, which was maintained by this blood relationship, were considered to belong together. In the very beginning of the development of mankind on earth, marriage was only practiced within very narrow circles, in families of the same bloodline. The “local marriage” was what was adhered to in the beginning of human development. The narrow circles of blood became wider and wider. People married outside their own tribe, but not yet into another nation. The people of the Old Testament held fast to the maintenance of the blood relationship between nations. He is a “Jew” who is a Jew according to blood.

[ 14 ] Christ Jesus does not address this principle; he addresses those who break through this principle of mere blood relationship, and he shows the important thing he has to show, therefore not first within Judea, but outside in Galilee. Galilee was the area where peoples from all kinds of tribes and nations were mixed. The “Galilean” means the “mulatto”. To the Galileans goes the Christ Jesus, to those who are most mixed. And from what underlies such reproduction of humanity, brought about by mixture, there should arise what is no longer bound to the material basis of love. That is why what he has to say is said at a wedding. Why at a wedding? Because a wedding can be used to indicate the reproduction of humanity. And what he wants to show is not shown where people only marry within narrower limits, where they only marry within blood ties, but where they marry independently of blood ties. That is why it is said at a wedding, and specifically at a wedding in Galilee. And if we want to understand what is being shown here, then we must again take a look at the whole development of humanity.

[ 15 ] It has often been emphasized that for the occultist there is no such thing as something external, something merely material. For him, everything material is an expression of something soul-spiritual. And just as your face is the expression of a soul-spiritual reality, so the light of the sun is the expression of a soul-spiritual light. Everything that appears to be merely material is at the same time the expression of deeper spiritual processes. Occultism does not deny the material; to it even the coarsest material is the expression of a soul-spiritual. Thus, the spiritual processes of development in the world are always paralleled by material facts.

[ 16 ] When we look back in spirit to the development of mankind when humanity was still on the old continent between Europe and America, on the old Atlantis, and how different generations finally led us to the later post-Atlantic period, we can visualize the whole process of human development from the fourth to the fifth race, if we look at it from the racial point of view, in such a way that, during the post-Atlantean period, the individual ego of the human personality should gradually develop and mature out of humanity, which in Atlantis was still completely immersed in the group soul. What the Christ brought spiritually through his mighty spiritual impulse had to be slowly prepared by other impulses as well. What Yahweh did was to place the group soul ego in the astral body and thus prepare it for slow maturation to receive the fully independent “I am”. But this I AM could only be grasped by the human being if his physical body also became a suitable tool to house this I AM. You can easily imagine that the astral body, however capable it may be of receiving an ego, is not able to receive an “I am” if the physical body is not a suitable tool for truly grasping the “I am” in waking consciousness. The physical body must always be the appropriate tool for what is developing here on earth. Thus, when the astral body had matured, the physical body had to be prepared to become a tool for the “I am”. And that is what happened in human evolution.

[ 17 ] We can follow the processes by which the physical body was prepared to become a vehicle for the self-conscious human being, the “I am”. Even the Bible hints at this: that the one who becomes the progenitor in a certain respect in the post-Atlantean time, that Noah is the first wine drinker, the first to experience the effect of alcohol. Here we come to a chapter that may really be shocking for some. What emerges as a special cult in the post-Atlantean period is the Dionysian service. You all know how the cult of Dionysus is associated with wine. This strange substance is only introduced to humanity in the post-Atlantean period, and it has an effect on humanity. You know that every substance has some kind of effect on people, and alcohol has a very specific effect on the human organism. It had a mission in the course of human development; it had — as strange as it seems — the task of preparing the human body, so to speak, in such a way that it was cut off from the connection with the divine, so that the personal “I am” could emerge. The effect of alcohol is to cut man off from the connection with the spiritual world in which man used to be. This effect of alcohol still exists today. Alcohol has not been in humanity for nothing. In a future humanity, it will be possible to say in the fullest sense of the word that alcohol had the task of pulling man down so far into matter that he became selfish, and that alcohol led him to claim the ego for himself and no longer to place it at the service of the whole people. So the opposite service that the group soul of humanity has done is what alcohol has done. He has taken away from people the ability to feel at one with a whole in higher worlds. Hence the cult of Dionysus, which cultivates living together in a kind of external intoxication. A merging into a whole, without seeing this whole. The development in the post-Atlantic period has been linked to the cult of Dionysus because this cult was a symbol for the function and mission of alcohol. Now that humanity is once again striving to find its way back, when the ego has developed to such an extent that the human being can reconnect with the divine-spiritual powers, now the time has come when, initially even from the unconscious, a certain reaction against alcohol is occurring. This reaction occurs because many people today already feel that something that once had a special meaning is not forever justified.

[ 18 ] What has now been said about the task of alcohol in a particular time need not be understood as a speech in favor of alcohol; rather, it was said to make it clear that alcohol's mission is fulfilled and that different things are appropriate for different times. But it also emerged in the same epoch, when humanity had been drawn down the deepest into selfishness by alcohol, the strongest power that can give man the greatest impulse to find union with the spiritual whole again. On the one hand, man had to descend to the lowest level in order to become independent; on the other hand, however, the strong power had to come from outside that could give the impulse again to find the way back to the Whole.

[ 19 ] The Christ had to hint at this in the first sign of his mission. He had to indicate, first, that the “I” should become independent, and then that He was addressing those who had already detached themselves from blood relationships. He had to address such a wedding, where the bodies were under the influence of alcohol; for wine is drunk at this wedding. And the Christ Jesus shows how he sees his mission in relation to the different periods on earth. How often it is expressed quite strangely what the transformation of water into wine means here. Even from the pulpit one can hear that by this nothing else is meant than that the stale water of the Old Testament should be replaced by the strong wine of the New Testament. It was probably wine lovers who have always loved this kind of interpretation. Because these symbols are not that simple. It must be emphasized that the Christ says: My mission is such that it points to the farthest future; and it is to be brought to people as independent human beings, the connection with the Godhead, the love for the Godhead as a free gift of the independent self. This love should bind man to the deity in freedom, just as an inner compulsive impulse of the group soul had previously incorporated him into that deity.

[ 20 ] Let us now grasp in the sense of an atmosphere what humanity experienced. Above all, let us grasp the thoughts that people had at the time. It was said: Man was once connected to the group soul and felt his connection to the deity. Then he evolved downwards. This was regarded as becoming entangled in the material, as a degeneration, as a kind of apostasy from the divine, and the question was asked: Where did what man has now originally come from? What had he fallen away from? The further we go back in the evolution of the earth, the more we find that solid substances increasingly change into liquids under the influence of warmer conditions. But we know that when the earth was still a liquid planet, man was already present. But in those days man was also less detached from the deity than later. To the same extent that the earth solidified, man also materialized. When the earth was liquid, man was already contained in the water; but he could only live on an earth that had already deposited solid matter. That is why the solidification of man was felt in such a way that it was said: Man is born out of the earth, which was still water, but at that time he was still completely connected to the divine. Everything that brought him into matter defiled him. Those who were to remember this ancient connection with the divine were baptized with baptism in water. This was to be the symbol of this: become aware of your ancient connection with the divine, and that you are defiled, have descended to your present state! Thus the Baptist also baptized, in order to make men aware of their connection with the Godhead. And so all baptism was meant in ancient times. It is a radical expression, but one that brings home to us what is meant.

[ 21 ] The Christ Jesus was to baptize with something else. He was not to point men to the past, but to the future through the evolution of spirituality within them. Through the “holy,” through the unclouded spirit, man's spiritual nature was to become coherent with the Godhead. Baptism with water was a baptism of remembrance. But baptism with the “Holy Spirit” is a prophetic baptism that points to the future. The connection that was completely lost, which baptism by water was supposed to recall, has also been lost in what was expressed in the symbol of the wine, the sacrificial wine. Dionysus is the dismembered god who has moved into the individual souls, so that the individual parts no longer knew about each other. Through what has been brought to humanity through alcohol - the symbol for Dionysus - man has been thrown into many pieces, scattered, into matter. But a great principle is retained at the wedding of Cana. This is the pedagogical principle of evolution. There are absolute truths, but they cannot be handed down to humanity at any time without further ado. Every time must have its special tasks, its special truths.

[ 22 ] Why are we allowed to talk about reincarnation and so on today? Why are we allowed to sit together in such a gathering and cultivate spiritual science? We are allowed to do so because all the souls that are in you today have been incarnated on earth in so many bodies so many times. Many of the souls that are in you today have once lived within the Germanic countries, where the Druid priests have stepped under them and brought what is spiritual wisdom in the form of myths and legends to the soul. And because the soul took it in then in that form, it is now able to take it in in a different form, in an anthroposophical form. Then in the image, today in the form of anthroposophy. But the truth could not have been presented in today's form then. You must not believe that the old Druid priest could have proclaimed the truth in this form, as it is done today. But Anthroposophy is the form that is suitable for today's or the immediate future of people. In later incarnations, the truth will be proclaimed and worked for in completely different forms, and what is called Anthroposophy today will be told as a memory, as legends and fairy tales are told today. The Anthroposophist must not be so foolish as to say: In ancient times there was only foolishness and childish views, and “only we have come so gloriously far today”. — That is what those who claim to be monists do, for example. But we work in spiritual science to prepare the next epoch. For if our epoch were not there, the next would not come either. But no one should use the present to excuse the future either. A lot of nonsense is also done with the doctrine of reincarnation. I have met people who have said that they do not need to be decent people in their present incarnation, that they still have time for that later. But if you don't start today, the consequence of that will happen in the next incarnation.

[ 23 ] Thus we must realize that there is no absolute in the forms of truth, but that each time that is recognized which corresponds to a certain epoch of humanity. The highest impulse had to descend, so to speak, to the level of the habits of life of that time. For He had to clothe the highest truth in words and actions that were appropriate to the understanding of the time. Thus, through a kind of Dionysus or wine sacrifice, the Christ had to express how humanity should rise to divinity. One must not ask, “Why does Christ turn water into wine?” One must consider the time. Through a kind of Dionysian sacrifice, Christ had to prepare what was to come. Christ goes to the Galileans, who are a motley crew from all nations, not bound by blood ties, and does the first sign of his mission there; and he adapts himself so much to their way of life that he changes water into wine for them.

[ 24 ] Let us note what the Christ is actually trying to say: I will also lead those people to a spiritual connection who have descended to the level of materiality symbolized by drinking wine. And he does not want to be there only for those who can rise through the symbol of baptism. It is very significant that we are expressly informed that there are six pitchers of water here (2, 6). We shall come back to the number again. “Purification” is what is effected by baptism. In the times from which the Gospel originates, when the fact of baptism was expressed, one spoke of “baptism” as a purification. But the actual word “baptism” was never spoken; instead, they said “to baptize”; and the effect of baptism was called “cleansing.” You will never find the corresponding word, AurriSewv, in the Gospel of John in any form other than as a verb. But when it is used as a noun, it always expresses the cleansing effect, so that man should remember his state of purification, his connection with the Godhead. Thus, even in the symbolic jugs for the purification sacrifice, Christ Jesus makes the sign by which he points to his mission, in accordance with the era.

[ 25 ] Thus, something of the deepest mission of the Christ is expressed to us in the wedding at Cana in Galilee. And there He had to say: My time will come in the future; but now it has not yet arrived. What I have to accomplish here is still partly connected with what must be overcome through My mission. He stands in the present and at the same time points to the future, thus showing how he works not in the absolute sense but in the cultural-educational sense for the time. It is therefore the mother who asks him: “You don't have wine.” But He says: What I have to accomplish now is still connected with the old days, with “me and you”; for my actual time, when the wine will be transformed back into water, has not yet come. How could it even make sense to say, “Woman, what do I have to do with you?” when He then does what the mother said! It only makes sense if we are to be reminded that the present state of humanity has been brought about through blood relationship, and that a sign is given in the sense of the old customs that still require the addition of alcohol to point to the time when the independent ego emerges from the blood ties, that for the time being we which is symbolized in wine, must still be reckoned with, but that a later time will come when it will be “its time”.

[ 26 ] And now, chapter by chapter, we are shown two things in the Gospel of John: firstly, that what is communicated is communicated for those who are able to grasp occult truths in a certain way. Today, spiritual science is presented exoterically, but in those days, spiritual truths could only be understood by those who were truly initiated to a certain extent in one way or another. Who could understand something of the deeper facts of which Christ Jesus had to say? Only he could understand it who was able to perceive outside of the body, who could step out of the body and become conscious in the spiritual world. If Christ Jesus wanted to speak to people who could understand him, they had to be those who had been initiated in a certain way, who were already able to see spiritually in a certain way. When, for example, he speaks of the rebirth of the soul in the chapter about the conversation with Nicodemus, we are shown that he proclaims this truth to someone who sees with spiritual senses. You just have to read:

“Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews;
he came to Jesus by night...” (3, 1-2)

[ 27 ] Let us get used to weighing the words carefully! It is hinted to us that Nicodemus comes to Jesus “by night”, that is, outside of his physical body, to receive what Christ Jesus has to communicate to him. “By night” - that is, by making use of his spiritual senses, he comes to Christ Jesus. Just as Nathanael and Christ Jesus, as initiates, communicate with each other through the parable of the fig tree, so here too an ability to communicate is hinted at.

[ 28 ] And the other thing that is shown to us is that the Christ always wants to fulfill a mission that disregards mere blood ties. This is shown to us very clearly by the fact that He goes to the Samaritan woman at the well. He gives her the teaching that He wants to give to those whose I is set apart from the blood community.

"Then He came to a city of Samaria, called Sychar, near the plot of land that Jacob gave to his son Joseph.
Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus, being tired from the journey, was sitting on the well; and it was about the sixth hour.
Then comes a woman from Samaria to draw water. Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink.
For his disciples had gone into the city to buy food.
Then the Samaritan woman says to him, “How is it that you, being a Jew, ask a drink of me, when I am a Samaritan woman? (For the Jews had no dealings with the Samaritans).” (4:5-9)

[ 29 ] It is pointed out that it is something special that the Christ goes to a people whose sense of self has been lifted out of the group soul and uprooted. That is the important thing.

[ 30 ] From the account of the kingly it follows further: Not only does the Christ break down what is united by blood ties in intermarriage, but also what is separated by blood ties into classes. He comes to those whose sense of self is uprooted, so to speak. He heals the son of the royal family, who is actually a stranger to him according to the Jews' understanding. Everywhere you are pointed to the fact that Christ is the missionary of the independent ego that is found in every human individuality. Therefore, he may also say: “When I speak of myself, I do not speak in the higher sense of my ego that sits within me, but when I speak of the ‘I am’, I speak of an entity, of something that everyone finds within themselves. My ego is one with the Father; but the ego in general, which is in every personality, is one with the Father. This is also the deeper meaning of the teaching that the Christ gives to the Samaritan woman at the well. Above all, I would like to remind you of a saying that can open up a deep understanding for you if you understand it correctly: the passage from verses 31 to 34 in chapter 3, which of course must be read in such a way that one is aware that John the Baptist is saying these words:

"He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth is from the earth and speaks of the earth. He who comes from heaven is above all and testifies to what he has seen and heard, and no one accepts his testimony.
But whoever accepts it has set his seal to this, that God is true. For he whom God has sent speaks the words of God; for God does not give the Spirit by measure.

[ 31 ] I would like to meet the person who really understands these words according to this translation. What is the contrast: “He who comes from God speaks the words of God, for God does not give the Spirit according to measure!” What is the meaning of these sentences?

[ 32 ] Through countless discourses, Christ wants to say: When I speak of the “I,” I speak of the eternal “I” in man, which is one with the spiritual source of the world. When I speak of this “I,” I speak of something that dwells in the very innermost part of the human soul. If someone listens to me – and now he is only talking about the lower self, which feels nothing of the eternal – he does not accept my testimony, he does not understand me at all. For I cannot speak of something that flows from me to him. Then he would not be independent. Everyone must find the God I proclaim within themselves as their eternal foundation. – Just a few verses back you will find the passage:

“Now John was still baptizing in Enon, near to Salim, because there was much water there; and they came and were baptized.
For John had not yet been put in prison.
Then there arose a question between John's disciples and the Jews about purification” (3, 23-25),

[ 33 ] that is, about the form of baptism. When such a question was raised in this circle, it was always about the connection with the divine and about man's immersion in matter, and how, according to the old idea of God, one was connected to the divine through the group soul. Then came others, saying to John: But Jesus also baptizes! And then John must first make clear to them that what comes into the world through Jesus is something very special. And he makes this clear to them by saying: Jesus does not teach the context symbolized by the old baptism, but he teaches how man is led by the free gift of the self that has become independent; and everyone must discover the “I am,” the God, in himself, only in this way does he come into a position to find the divine within himself. When these words are read in this way, the listener realizes that He Himself, that the “I am” is sent by God. One who is sent by God, who is sent to ignite the “God” in this way, also proclaims the God in the true sense, no longer according to blood relationship.

[ 34 ] And now let us translate this passage into terms of what it really means. We can get the materials for this if we are clear about what the teachings of the ancients were. These were artfully written down in many books. We need only recall the Psalms, where the Divine is proclaimed in beautifully composed speeches in the Old Testament. There one speaks only of the ancient blood connections as the connection with a god. One could learn all this, but one never learned more from all this than that one is connected with this ancient deity. But if one wanted to understand the Christ, all the old laws and all the old contrivances were not needed. What the Christ taught could be grasped to the extent that one comprehended the spiritual self within oneself. Then one could not yet have full knowledge of the Godhead, but one could understand what one heard from the lips of Christ Jesus. Then one had the prerequisite for understanding. Then one did not need all the psalms, all the artfully composed teachings, but one needed only the simplest, and those were babbling expressions. One need only babble in one's words and one will bear witness to the God. One could do that even in the simplest babbling words; it only needed to be individual words that have no “measure” at all. He who merely babbled, who felt in his innermost being that he was sent by God, could understand what the Christ spoke. He who is aware only of the earthly connection with God speaks in the meter of the Psalms, but all his metrical structure leads him to nothing but the old gods. But the one who feels grounded in the spiritual worlds is above all, and he can bear witness to what he has seen and heard in the spiritual worlds. But his testimony is not accepted by those who only accept a testimony in the usual way. If there are those who accept it, then they show by their acceptance that they feel they are sent by God. They do not just believe what the other person is telling them, they understand it, and they themselves seal their words with their understanding. “He who feels the ‘I’ reveals the words of God even in babbling.” That is what it means. For the spirit meant here needs not express itself in any meter, in any syllabic measure; but it can express itself in the simplest babbling manner. Such words are easily taken as a license for a right to unwisdom. But those who reject wisdom because, in their opinion, the highest secrets must be expressed in the simplest form do so - albeit often unconsciously - only out of a certain inclination towards mental laziness. When it is said, “God does not give the Spirit according to measure,” it is meant only that measure does not help the Spirit; but where the Spirit really is, there measure also arises. Not everyone who has measure has the Spirit; but he who has the Spirit certainly comes to measure. Of course, certain things must not be reversed: it is not a sign of having the Spirit if one has measure, although, conversely, having measure is not a sign of the Spirit either. Science is certainly not a sign of wisdom, but ignorance certainly is not either.

[ 35 ] Thus we are shown that the Christ appeals to the I that has become independent in every human soul. Here you have to take “measure” in the sense of “syllable measure”, like artfully constructed language. And the previous sentence literally reads: “He who grasps God in the ‘I am’ bears witness to divine or divine language even in babbling and finds the way to God.”