The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Dear attendees! Anyone who speaks in all seriousness about a topic such as this evening's, or the one that I will discuss here in Utrecht on the 24th, must be aware that there are already numerous souls in the present who long for a new world view or at least for a new slant on the world view and on the way we live.

It can be said, however, that not all of the souls yearning for such a new direction in our present time are fully aware of it. Much of this yearning lies dormant in the depths of the human soul. But for those who can look at the soul life of the individual as well as at the social life of the present impartially, it is clear that there is a search, a serious search, going on in the present for such souls. And this search is basically connected with the great civilizational questions of our present time.

There are many such issues of civilization in the present day, but they can all be more or less mastered if they are viewed from two perspectives. One great riddle that has been dwelling in human souls for a long time – one might say – and which today already finds a very special revelation in these souls, comes from the scientific development of the last three to four centuries. This scientific development has brought humanity great, tremendous triumphs in the realm of knowledge, and provided remarkable insights. But for those who approach the results of this modern science with all their soul, especially with regard to soul and spiritual questions, understanding becomes clearer and clearer. I would like to make it clear from the outset so as not to be misunderstood: the spiritual science that is anthroposophically oriented – and that is what I mean here in giving my explanations – is fully grounded in the modern, scientific way of thinking. But we will see that precisely because it wants to be fully grounded in this way, it must go beyond what is usually considered the limits of this scientific way of thinking. Those who not only want external knowledge for some practical or other life tasks, but who want to gain something for the life of their soul and spirit from scientific insights, will indeed, if they are open enough to do so, gradually realize that the deeper one delves into these insights, the more they are actually riddles, the less they solve anything for us that wells up from the depths of the soul as the great existential questions of human life. On the contrary, these scientific insights teach us something quite different; they teach us to ask the questions that arise from the depths of our souls as human beings more deeply and more fundamentally. They teach us to pose more riddles than we posed before. For someone so unbiased, who lives with all his soul into these insights, there is no other way than to establish a relationship between what science has brought in the last three to four centuries and what is given in the old, traditional religions as a real spiritual upliftment, as a real spiritual content. Theoretically, one can discuss at length the question of whether religious life, a person's deepening of their religious life, should follow a path of its own alongside more recent scientific knowledge. The soul of man is one, and he cannot help it, when on the one hand he draws life-nourishment for the eternal destiny of his soul from religious foundations, and on the other hand he accepts what [the natural sciences] have to say to him, for example, about the structure of the heavenly building, about the development of organic living beings and the like. He cannot help but ask: How do the two relate to each other? We can say with our intellect: the two areas of life flow from different sources. However much we may declaim about how they flow from different sources, in our soul they flow together, and we must seek a balance. But in the search for this balance, new riddles arise, to which the man of the present day, when he really looks up to the general educational life, when he is immersed in this general educational life, is driven, which trouble him, which call for some other sources, from which a real unification of our whole soul life must flow.

And so we see that one of the most important questions of civilization today is actually an inner question of the soul. We have to come to terms with ourselves before we can meaningfully intervene in social life. We have to gain a certain inner strength. Therefore, all external questions of life, all questions of practical life, are fundamentally dependent on the questions of the human soul.

On the one hand, there are the great issues of civilization in the present. But from another side, too, life's riddles come to the contemporary, the modern human being. Scientific knowledge has not remained mere knowledge. They have intervened in practical life in a remarkable and admirable way. They have brought us modern technology, which we encounter at every turn in our external lives today, without which modern humanity can no longer really live. But here too, the modern results, the practical results of the scientific way of thinking, have not actually brought us solutions, but basically new, practical puzzles for life. Over the last two to three centuries, we have managed to create a complicated technology and a complicated human life that goes with it. We had to put people in large numbers at the machine, which is a result of the modern scientific way of thinking. We had to put humanity into the modern traffic conditions, which are a result of this very way of thinking. In the field of purely mechanical-machine work, even where the mechanical occurs in commerce, in world transport, in the world economy, the scientific way of thinking has proven fruitful. But in relation to the social way of thinking, in relation to the way people interact with each other as human beings, it has, so to speak, left everything behind. There is no need to study this theoretically; it can be seen in the convulsions of a social nature that are manifesting themselves in the present and that have a shockingly disturbing effect on humanity. You can see it in how little advice there is in humanity at first, these forces that gradually take on a terribly destructive character, a life-destroying character, in some way beneficial to humanity to guide and direct.

And so, especially with regard to the human, the moral, the soul-spiritual in the interaction between people, many puzzles have arisen in this modern, civilized life. And we are faced with the great soul question: How does modern insight unite with what the religious needs of humanity are? And we are faced with the great practical, social question of life: how do we bring such a direction into what has become mechanical-technical life, that in a sense that has grown out of modern thinking, human interaction is possible in such a way that all people perceive this relationship as leading to a dignified existence?

In short, we are faced with civilizational issues that require solutions and that run in the two currents mentioned. The anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, about which I would like to speak here today, first of all in terms of its insights, wants to approach precisely these riddle-like questions that come to modern man from the two sides just characterized. But it must do so in a way that is still unfamiliar to the broad masses of humanity, to the civilized world. It is therefore regarded as fantasy by one side; it is perhaps regarded as something even worse by the other. But we cannot advance in the evolution of humanity if we do not dare to express what in any age, because it is unfamiliar, will be fought against with extraordinary vehemence.

We see it in the souls that feel what I have just described in a particularly sharp way; they long, as it were, for a flood of knowledge from the supersensible, spiritual world into the human soul. And today such longing souls come up with many things that are, however, not compatible with our present-day civilized life. We see numerous souls looking to what was available to our ancestors in ancient times: a certain harmony between religious sentiment, artistic expression and scientific knowledge. Through its research into ancient times, external anthropological science also imparts to humanity today things that command great respect for these ancient cultures.

Some people look to the Orient, where the remnants of an ancient and original wisdom have been preserved in a decadent way. They want to have a sense of what once was. We see this emerging in numerous souls, but if we really want to understand the meaning of human development, we have to realize that we can understand such souls who long for something ancient or for what remains of something ancient in decadence, such as Indian mysticism or the like. We can understand such a yearning, but we have to say that it completely contradicts the meaning of the whole of human development. For this development is such that each age has its own character. And what was once in keeping with the drives and feelings of the human soul in ancient times is no longer so today.

However, we must also say something else. We must say: this urge for the old or this urge to warm up oriental wisdom also arises from a certain tiredness in the modern human soul. This weariness of the modern human soul announces itself in the fact that although a person may immerse themselves in what is centuries or millennia old tradition, or devote themselves to what are traditional external arrangements of practical life, within today's complicated life, it is difficult for him to muster the strength to unfold a creativity, an elementary creativity in the human soul, that is capable of bringing new spiritual forces from the depths of the soul to the surface of the soul, that is capable of giving new guidelines to practical social life. It is easy for the modern person to devote himself, but creation is far removed from his soul, which is fundamentally very tired. But it is precisely the creative powers of the human soul that the anthroposophically oriented spiritual science referred to here seeks to address. For it believes that only through a new creation from the deepest, most elementary powers of the human soul can satisfaction come from what, in the manner characterized, is basically longed for by numerous people today from the great currents of civilization.

What spiritual science has to offer initially in terms of knowledge is, however, based entirely on the modern, scientific way of thinking. But at the same time, because it is based on this ground, it must go beyond this scientific way of thinking to the knowledge of a supersensible; while this scientific way of thinking only grasps the outer sense world and that which the mind can combine out of this sense world as abstract natural laws and the like with its means of knowledge, with its admittedly magnificent and admirable means of knowledge.

If I am to characterize the relationship between what I mean here as anthroposophically oriented spiritual science and this modern natural science, I would like to use a historical comparison. But I ask you not to count this comparison as immodesty. It is not meant that way. It is not a straightforward comparison that can be made today with spiritual science and the weak human power that corresponds to a great, powerful event, but rather with something that is also peculiar to this historical event: I am referring to the discovery of America. When Columbus set out to discover America, it was because he actually meant to cross the great ocean to reach what was already known to him from the other side, namely to reach India from the other side. So it was believed that one was heading for something already known. But on the way one found something unknown that had not been suspected.

This is basically the situation of the modern spiritual researcher. He wants to start from what modern life offers based on numerous scientific endeavors. He would like to venture out onto all the paths of research that are being taken in a conscientious and thoroughly methodical way in this modern scientific life. But on the way to this, he does not find what a large number of researchers basically think they are finding: a kind of knowledge that, although it is supposed to be distinguished from what we have around us in our sensory world by its smallness or the like, is still a kind of knowledge. Just as Columbus thought he was reaching India, that is, something familiar, so the researchers of the external sense realm want to discover atoms, molecules, ions, electrons and the like, which is nothing more than the smallest realization of what we already have in the sense world. And when we now look out into space with conscientious modern research methods, armed with all the admirable instruments that have been constructed, we also want to find nothing but what we already know here on earth. We construct the whole sky for ourselves out of the sensory elements that we already have on earth. One might expect this at first, and basically anyone who is not a dilettante in scientific life, but rather proceeds from the conscientious scientific life of the present, might expect something similar. But when he becomes very clear about what is actually available to him as a researcher, then he comes to something else. He may think he is coming to something familiar, to atoms, molecules, ions, electrons, but on the way he discovers something unknown, as unknown as America was to the Indian explorers. He discovers on the way, precisely by immersing himself in the thought processes, in the whole soul processes that he has to apply in scientific research, a previously unknown, supersensible world.

Anthroposophically oriented spiritual science aims to develop what one does inwardly in the soul through research in the clinic, in the laboratory, or at the observatory in a more refined and expanded way. By paying just the right amount of attention to this inner activity of the soul, it becomes clear that There it is the spirit, which, even if it adheres only to the external material, is active in you, especially in methodical research. And then, when one becomes aware of one's own activity in research, quite earnestly and as strongly as the human soul can, one gains the urge to further develop these soul powers that one carries within oneself, which are to be stimulated, as it were, by ordinary education. And then one comes to the spiritual scientific methods, of which I would like to give you a small indication here.

At the starting point of these spiritual scientific methods, however, there must be something that is also quite unfamiliar to today's humanity. That which I would call “intellectual modesty” must stand before the path of spiritual research. And again, I would like to explain what I mean by intellectual modesty by way of comparison. Imagine a five-year-old child, we give him a volume of Shakespeare in the hand, what will he do with it? It will tear him or play with him, but certainly it will not do that, what is appropriate for the band of Shakespeare. If the child has lived another ten to fifteen years, his soul forces will have developed so that it will do the right thing with this band of Shakespeare. We can say: What has been brought out of the most hidden depths of this child is what now enables him to do something quite different from what he was capable of earlier. If you want to become a spiritual researcher, you have to be able to say this with intellectual modesty: As an adult, you could face all of nature that surrounds us in the same way as the five-year-old child faces the volume of Shakespeare. might feel challenged to develop the soul forces further through their own use, just as the soul forces of the five-year-old child were gradually developed, whereby the child became something quite different from what it was before. Spiritual scientific research seeks to further develop methods such as those already begun in natural scientific research, only in a natural way. And this spiritual scientific research is not based on any external measures, it is based entirely on inner soul work. This inner soul work is certainly no easier to perform than the work in the laboratory, in the clinic or at the observatory. What I am about to describe to you as the inner soul path of the spiritual researcher requires years of inner effort for its real training, although one does not work with external tools or instruments, but only with the powers of the soul itself; and basically, these soul powers are already present in ordinary life, they just need to be further developed.

Today, humanity does not love to further develop such soul powers within itself. Precisely because of the modern path of development, people have come to no longer think as they did in certain ancient ages about human development. From one point of view, this is fully justified. But on the other hand, it is also the case that other views must take the place of those that are currently popular. It is precisely for this reason that many seeking souls today long unhistorically for a certain way in which our ancient ancestors came to their insights, because these ancestors saw something completely different in the path of knowledge than people today see in it.

In ancient times — I can only hint at this, you can already find more explanations in outer science today — in ancient times there were wisdom schools, which are also called mysteries. In these mysteries, a science that was directed more towards the intellect was not cultivated in the same way as it is today. Instead, a science was cultivated that spoke so intensely to the human soul that it into the depths of this soul, while at the same time releasing religious fervor from this soul, which so stimulated this soul that it received what it received as knowledge in artistic visions at the same time. Art, religion and science were one in these ancient mysteries. But in these ancient schools of wisdom, the attainment of higher knowledge was spoken of in such a way as to appeal to the whole person and not just to the head. And one spoke of something that is somewhat dangerous to speak of today, because one will be considered paradoxical or fanciful when speaking of it. They spoke of the fact that between what a person can know, feel and want in ordinary life and that to which his soul actually belongs as the supersensible, an abyss opens up between these two areas of outer and inner life; that this abyss can only be crossed by the human soul through overcoming, through inner struggles. They spoke of the threshold that separates ordinary life from the supersensible world, to which the soul actually belongs. And it was said that man is protected by the world powers from entering the realm of supersensible knowledge unprepared. It was not a mere personification, but a very real experience for the students of the old wisdom schools when they spoke of the Guardian of the Threshold. This Guardian of the Threshold had not been experienced if one did not want to cross the abyss between the sensual and the supersensible world. But one had to pass by him if one wanted to enter this supersensible world. He only became visible, so to speak, when one wanted to swing one's insights up to the supersensible regions of existence. But one should not and must not do that, the old wisdom teachers said, without the human being being prepared in a healthy way and without fulfilling other conditions.

For differently than we speak now, people in ancient times spoke of what actual human wisdom and human science is. They said: The unprepared person, when handed the science of the supersensible, becomes a source of temptation for him, not only to do good but also to do evil. Knowledge of the supernatural incites human desires that would otherwise remain silent and tamed by external morality. These desires can no longer be tamed by insight into the supernatural. That is why these ancient wisdom teachers demanded of their students that they undergo such a discipline of the will, such an education, that these instincts receded, that these instincts no longer spoke, so that these students listened to everything that the ancient wisdom teachers presented to them as pure morality by virtue of their natural authority. And they demanded strict obedience.

You see, this was a relationship between student and teacher that has been preserved in many ecclesiastical contexts. But you will also admit that modern life is such that people no longer want to have such a relationship in any area. We can look up with great respect and full understanding to those ancient times when certain commandments, strict commandments for ethics, morality, obedience, and religious respect were handed over to the student of science and wisdom – otherwise they were not handed over if they did not submit to these conditions. We can understand this in the past, but today we can no longer enter into such relationships with science and wisdom from our modern, humane circumstances. Those who want to revive the old wisdom of the East do not understand this. Today we need something different, and this is revealed to us from a fact that I will characterize in the following way.

First of all, I would like to ask why it was that the ancient teachers of wisdom subjected their students to such strict discipline, willpower, and will training before they handed down their knowledge and wisdom? The reason for this was that the state of mind of people in the distant past was quite different from that of our own. External history only gives us the outer appearance of human development. The fact that the human soul has indeed undergone tremendous metamorphoses over the course of time is something of which this external history tells us very little today. We do not need to go back to ancient India or other regions of the Orient; we only need to look back to the times of ancient Greece, perhaps to the somewhat earlier and middle periods of ancient Greece, and we find a very different state of mind in people. That which we call intellect, that to which we attach such great importance as our intellectual culture, was not yet developed as a separate faculty of the soul in these older people. In them, instincts, drives, volitional impulses, emotional stirrings, and emotional forces rose up from the depths of the soul and permeated abstract concepts. Cognition worked its way out of the full human being, not just out of the head. We can only begin to understand what knowledge was for the Greeks if we can enter into this origin of their knowledge from the full human being.

This has changed in our time. From the Galilean-Copernican world view and from everything that is connected with it in the modern conception of nature, intellectual life has developed one-sidedly for us.

Some of you will surely say: This intellectual life would not be as one-sided as I would like to present it. It is true that we experiment. We are dealing with external facts and with what they reveal, and not with the mere intellect. We observe conscientiously according to our methods in all realms of nature and in the rest of the world. We are not dealing with the mere intellect. Of course we experiment and observe, but in doing so we apply only our intellect to these experiments and observations. And we are intent on recognizing as science and human wisdom only that which is gained from the experiment and the observation by the intellect of such natural laws or historical laws that can be expressed in intellectual forms. Our entire disposition has become intellectualistic. In this way it differs from the old soul disposition.

This old soul disposition, it came - not merely concepts, not merely ideas, but feelings and soul content about the world itself - from the depths of the whole human organization. There was a world knowledge for the ancients when they set out on the path of knowledge at all. They felt so closely connected with nature that, by observing minerals, plants, and animals, and by observing the physical human being, they simultaneously observed something spiritual and soul-like everywhere. Today we call this animism, but we know very little about the essence of what we are dealing with. This essence consists in the fact that in ancient times, when man looked at the outer nature, he did not just have the dry outer sensory perception before him, but a spiritual essence came out of everything to meet him. He knew that lightning was intimately connected with what was going on inside himself. He knew that moving clouds were connected with what was going on inside himself. He felt that he belonged to the whole universe. He felt as a part of the universe as a finger would feel about me as a part of me, if it had a consciousness. From this sense of the world all ancient knowledge emerged. But this sense of the world was only present because the sense of self, even in the ancient Greeks, was not as developed as our sense of self. The sense of self was dull, and that is why the old wisdom teacher said: One must not simply introduce the students to a higher knowledge, for which a higher sense of self is absolutely necessary, because if they came to this knowledge unprepared, they would fall into a kind of mental powerlessness. This mental powerlessness should be combated through the discipline of the will, the education of the will.

What about us? Yes, we can see this best from the following: Today we are justifiably proud of what we know, for example, about the structure of the external world through the Copernican worldview. We now profess the view that the sun is at the center of our planetary system and that the earth moves at great speed around the sun. We call this the heliocentric worldview, in contrast to the worldview of the Middle Ages and antiquity, which had placed the Earth at the center of our planetary system, so that man felt on the firm ground of the Earth, resting in space and letting the Sun circle with the other planets around the Earth. But even from the external history one can see that what we today call the heliocentric worldview was not unknown to the ancients, that it was not unknown in the schools of wisdom. Today's world view does not speak of this. But if you just read Plutarch's account of the astronomical view of Aristarchus of Samos, centuries before the emergence of Christianity, you will see that Aristarchus of Samos proclaimed the heliocentric world view, that he placed the sun at the center of the planetary system, that he made the earth revolve around the sun. Aristarchus of Samos only proclaimed in a more outwardly perceptible way what had otherwise been proclaimed to the students in the wisdom schools, after they had first undergone the preparation. And many other things were taught there that, like the Copernican world view and the heliocentric solar system, are now part of our general education, things that we learn, so to speak, at elementary school as part of our general education.

Thus we can note the remarkable fact that the ancient teachers of wisdom only handed down to their pupils what is now part of our normal school education after the pupils had undergone a strict training of the will. They awakened in their pupils the consciousness that they had to cross the threshold to the spiritual world. After that, they imparted to them the things that are now part of our general education.

We stand, so to speak, beyond the threshold through the very ordinary human development. The sense of historical metamorphosis is that what was given to students in ancient times, for example, only after tremendous preparation, is learned by every child today. Every child is led beyond the threshold today, which the ancients described in the characterized way. Why is that? It is because, through human development, we in turn have a different inner soul disposition from that of the ancients. We are no longer exposed to the soul fainting and soul numbness that had to be feared in ancient times. For centuries, we have, as civilized humanity, undergone a strengthening, an invigoration, precisely of our self-awareness through intellectual education. This self-awareness cannot be diminished, paralyzed, or rendered powerless by our entering into the world, which for the ancients was the world beyond the threshold. It cannot. The ancients would have said something like this: If one wanted to convey to the unprepared human being the realization that the earth moves in space with great speed, he would feel as if he were losing the ground under his feet, he would have the mental and spiritual feeling of losing his footing, as if he were becoming dizzy in his existence.

That is not the case today. But we are facing something different instead. The knowledge of the world that the ancients had instinctively is lost to us today, because we recognize from the outer world of the senses what was only given to the ancients after long preparation. We are standing at a different threshold today. We are just learning from the conscientious natural scientist how we must speak of the “limits of knowledge”, of “ignorabimus”. We sense this limit of knowledge wherever this knowledge of nature has to be put into practice for the benefit of humanity. We sense it in modern medicine, where it is so difficult to build a bridge from pathology to the actual practice of healing. We sense it when we want to apply the results of our knowledge to social life. We sense these limits, they are there.

We feel we have been moved to a new threshold. The task of spiritual science is to cross this threshold in a way that is appropriate for modern man. Therefore, it starts from intellectual modesty in order to bring back to its measure that which has just become great in modern man, and to develop the human soul forces out of the full human being. Spiritual science takes as its starting point two soul powers that are well known in ordinary life, and develops them further. It begins with what we call the power of memory in ordinary life. What does this power of memory give us in our ordinary human existence? It conjures up from memory what we have experienced since our birth or a few years after, what we have been through. These appear before our soul in more or less faded images through memory. What happens in this life fades away. We know, and modern science characterizes it very clearly, that when this ability to remember is not intact, there is a serious inner soul disease. This coherent memory, reaching back to childhood, must be present in the human being.

The methods of spiritual science take this power of remembrance as their starting point. They develop this power of remembrance into something different, into something more highly developed, through what I have described in detail in my book 'How to Know Higher Worlds', in my 'Occult Science', in other of my writings, through what I call meditation or concentration. Here, however, I can only give a rough outline of what must actually happen to the soul in order to come to an immediate grasp of the supersensible world. Man must rest in a devoted way, rest energetically and patiently on ideas that are either recommended to him or that he prepares for himself by getting to know spiritual science. While otherwise the images flit past, he must, as memory becomes lasting, rest, and keep on resting, on clear images, and this he must do out of inner arbitrariness, out of complete inner composure — which must be as great as that which we develop in mathematical thinking — and this inner composure must be as great as that which we develop in mathematical thinking. Then, after some time, he will make a very definite discovery. He will feel that with his ordinary ability to remember, he is dependent on his organism. But if he further develops his ability to remember into a completely new soul power, then he is placed in a spiritual-soul activity in relation to which he is no longer dependent on his organism. He learns to understand what it means to think, feel, will or perform similar activities without the body providing the basis for it. He learns to unfold a soul life outside of his body.

I would like to characterize this soul life, which the human being gets to know as a spiritual researcher, in yet another way. We find that the ordinary life of a human being proceeds in such a way that it alternates between waking and sleeping. The human being goes through the states of falling asleep, sleeping and waking up. When falling asleep, consciousness is dulled. The human being is not aware of what he is going through between falling asleep and waking up because it is not shown by what pulses through the organism from the will. But what pulsates through the organism from the will, what the senses offer the human being in the way of perception, the spiritual researcher silences by immersing himself in self-made images. The content of the images is not important, but the immersion is, so that he feels the activity within him, which wells up from the depths of the soul through such resting on images, such lasting resting. He learns to be in a state in which one is otherwise only in sleep. But while one is unconscious in sleep, one is in a fully conscious state, in inner soul activity and soul activity. Only, this soul activity and soul activity does not refer, as the memory images of ordinary life, to things that we have gone through in the outer world and that now only arise from memory, but those images - I call them imaginations in the cited works — they can be immediately recognized as depicting a world that we have not lived through between birth and the present moment, but a world that is outside of us, just as colors and sounds are outside of us for the senses, just as warmth qualities are outside of us. We learn experientially that the spiritual world surrounds us; a spiritual world with real spiritual beings; that we are also in it in the time between falling asleep and waking up. But now we learn to look at it as a real world.

And by learning to see it in this way, we can broaden our view beyond life between birth and death. Let us learn to recognize at an elementary level how the life of sleep is nothing other than a separation of the spiritual soul from the physical body – not spatially, but dynamically. And how, when a person sleeps, there is a growing , there is an urge to return to the body. Through such inner vision, as it arises from the developed ability to remember, we learn to observe how sleep is nothing other than a separation of the spiritual soul from the physical body – not spatially, but dynamically. And we also learn to observe it in the times that preceded our birth, in which we lived in a spiritual-soul world from which we descended through birth, through conception into this physical-sensual world. We learn to distinguish between what lives in the soul as a mere desire to penetrate the body again, and the very different, stronger power that pervades the soul in the times when it is not yet conceived or born in a physical body, but which nevertheless tends to descend into the physical world in order to experience life between birth and death. Then we learn to recognize, as a development of what we have gained from the moment of falling asleep, what the soul experiences when it passes through the gate of death. We learn to recognize how this soul, because it is inwardly active, is driven precisely by the desire for the body lying in the bed; but as a result, its consciousness is extinguished. In death, consciousness is not extinguished, but remains. We learn to recognize that the extinction of consciousness in ordinary sleep comes from the fact that the bond between soul and body remains intact. When we learn to see through this, we also see through the mystery of death, just as we learn to see through the mystery of birth in the way indicated.

And so we learn to look at that which underlies us as human beings, as our eternal self, which passes through birth and death. We learn to recognize the inner strength of the human soul. We learn to recognize that which leads us through death. We learn to recognize that when the soul is led through death, at first it has no connection to a physical body, but that it receives this connection as a strength, so that it can descend to a new life. What we call 'repeated earthly lives' in spiritual science is not warmed-over oriental wisdom; it is drawn from the facts of spiritual life, which can be seen through in the present, and is scientifically extracted from them in the same way as other things are discovered by science. And anyone who says that such things are merely old wisdom, such as Gnostic or Oriental, or Indian wisdom, should just say: when we do geometry today, we are merely warming up the old Euclid. No, it is not just something historical that is brought out, but what is to be said about such things is brought out of original insights.

But then, when we get to know ourselves in this way, when we tap into the eternal of knowledge, then the eternal, the supersensible, the spiritual of the outer world also opens up to us. Then we will gain a different relationship to nature research than is otherwise possible for us in relation to today's civilizational spiritual current. What does the modern scientific world view give us – and if it is honest, it cannot give us anything else? Modern natural science, which must not be reproached for what I am about to characterize, can offer nothing else if it proceeds honestly and conscientiously. It can only give us a picture of external, natural, necessary events. It cannot help but look back to the times of the earth's formation, which it deduces from biological, astronomical, and other facts. At the starting point of this development, there is a nebulous world or something similar. Even if this is regarded as hypothetical today, science cannot arrive at anything other than the conclusion that man once formed out of purely external natural laws, which only imply an elementary necessity, but that the scene on which man forms will one day fall like a cinder into the sun, that everything that man experiences inwardly will be extinguished.

And so we get to know, alongside what an honest study of nature can offer us, how the moral world, ethical ideals, the whole spiritual and religious life, arises from within us . We feel it as the most valuable thing in us, but we cannot connect it to this outer world, because we find no connection between the moral in us and the physical-natural outside of us. If we want to remain on the ground of today's world view, we must regard them as two parallel worlds. But then the scientific world view asserts its persuasive power in such a way that it nevertheless predominates, that it nevertheless says: the ideals may be beautiful, they must be so, man must recognize them as valuable, but the world in which we live will one day be the great churchyard where the ideals that are now most valuable to us will be buried.

Through spiritual science, by looking into the transcendental world, by seeing the spiritual in every stone, in plants and animals, in clouds and springs, as it was revealed to the ancients; by developing the organs of the spiritual within himself, by learning to recognize himself as belonging to the spiritual world, he also comes to know the outer spiritual world in all of nature. But through this he can look back into distant times and say to himself: That which has come into being materially, in which you live today, has emerged from the spiritual, and that which you experience today as material will in turn be transformed into physical dross in the future; the physical dross will fall away, as the body falls away from the dying man. But just as the earthly-dying human soul enters the spiritual world, so that which lives in man, in humanity, will enter a spiritual world. The material world appears as a middle piece between one spiritual and another development. Man, however, belongs to the spiritual development of primeval times and he belongs to the future.

And today, when we see the interconnection of the world through spiritual science, through real knowledge of the supersensible, we can say: It is not true that what surrounds us as the material world has a future in the way that external science, if it is honest, must recognize. Rather, we have to say to ourselves: that which is external nature will fall away from that which is internal, and what human souls carry within themselves will leave the spiritual realm to which human beings belong, just as the body leaves the human soul. But that which lives in us today as moral ideals, as religious experiences, will have a future. One day it will break free from the earth, just as the individual human soul breaks free from the human body to find life and not death.

But when man learns to feel: That which is moral in him is like the germ of a plant; when the plant, when blossoms and leaves wither and dry up, the germ remains for the next year from the previous year's plant; we carry within us as a germ a distant future in which the earth will no longer be; when everything else by which we belong to the earth falls away from us; we carry our ideals, our fulfilled duties, we carry the social and religious life within us, which escapes from the earth with humanity. Let us consider what this means for the impulses that a person takes up for their social action. With such an awareness, they no longer stand in social life like a hermit on earth who can only think: I fulfill what is pleasant for me as a duty between birth and death, because the earth is only a body in space; it passes away. And when it has passed away materially, what is to become of ideals? If he remains true to natural science, if he does not claim to know from other sources what need not be united with natural science, then he will necessarily have to insert what ideals are into natural necessity. But thanks to spiritual science, his earthly consciousness is joined to the cosmic consciousness. This is the way to think about these things that the modern man needs.

Let us imagine today's social life. We make great social demands as today's humanity, but we have little social in our inner soul condition. We do not have social instincts, social drives. It is precisely because we do not have them that we demand so much from life on the outside. But everything that a person today feels as selfishness in relation to the social instincts is basically only an expression of the consciousness of the hermit on earth, as corresponds to the purely scientific view. If we learn to recognize that Everything you do for your neighbor or your fellow human beings, everything you do in the context of humanity, has a cosmic significance, a significance far beyond what it is for the day. If you link your earthly existence with your universal existence, you know that you are part of the universal existence, then social issues take on different impulses than they do today.

Therefore, it is indeed the case that something can be given to people from three sides through what anthroposophically oriented spiritual science wants to develop. First of all, they are given a new understanding of the human being, an insight into the supersensible foundations of their existence. They are given self-knowledge in the true sense of the word. They can cross the threshold again. The limits of knowledge of nature can be crossed. He can again transcend himself; he can again enter into the world to which he belongs with his soul and spirit.

That is one thing: that the human being thereby gains inner support and security; that he does not sink into the abyss when he wants to acquire knowledge of the world, when he does not want to look at the unknown beyond the carpet of sensory perception. But when a person recognizes himself in this way, in his entire cosmic context, then he also encounters the other person with the respect that must arise when one knows: with every person there is a spiritual soul aspect. Our whole legal and constitutional life is placed on a different footing when we know that it only makes sense because it is the outer covering of that which is transplanted to earth from the spiritual realm of human souls, which we can also see through in terms of knowledge.

And the third thing is that human life takes on an immediate religious nuance, real brotherhood, because man behaves as we can understand the word, the wonderful word of Christ: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.” So said the Being through whom the earth first received its meaning, without which it would have no meaning.

But it is true that this is the case with human ideals themselves. They germinate while the rest is ripe and withers all around. They are for the future. Everything that is lived out socially is basically the germ of future worlds; just as what surrounds us today as the natural world, as the material world, is the material expression of earlier moral worlds. If we see this clearly, we will be strengthened from three sides. And social life must also be transformed from within.

In 1913 and 1908, I spoke in Holland about spiritual science oriented towards anthroposophy. At that time I could only point out what this spiritual science was striving for, but not in a sectarian way or with the will to found a new religion. No, that is not what spiritual science wants. It wants to be science, and precisely through its scientific nature, to lead to the true religion, which places the mystery of Golgotha at the center of earthly development, in the right way. I was able to point out at the time how something like a world view has emerged in many souls. Since then, however, something has been added. We were able to start building the Goetheanum, a Free University for Spiritual Science, in Dornach near Basel in 1913. However, this construction has presented many difficulties; in particular, the times of the world catastrophe have also brought difficult times for this construction. But we can say that this fall, despite the fact that the building is not yet finished and much remains to be done to complete it, we were able to hold a number of courses. These courses were intended to show how the fundamentals of what I have described to you today — but which you can find more details about in the books I have mentioned — can have a fertilizing effect on all sciences as anthroposophically oriented spiritual science. Thirty personalities have been involved in these Dornach Autumn Courses, experts in all fields of science, from mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, jurisprudence, history and sociology. Artists also contributed, shedding light on spiritual science from their art. Men of practical life, of industrial and commercial life, have contributed to show how, when thinking in terms of spiritual science, one does not become an impractical person, but how one becomes more practical than one can be through any other contemporary way of life.

Furthermore, in the spring of 1920, I was able to show doctors and medical students, some of whom are here in Holland, in a course how what can be called medicine in the true sense of the word, how medicine can be fertilized by this insight into the supersensible life. For we come to know the inner nature of the outer products of life in the various kingdoms only when we are also able to observe them from the supersensible side. And those people who may absorb what is initially given in the form of a worldview through anthroposophically oriented spiritual science should at least make a little effort to inquire how one can speak with full knowledge of the subject to the experts; how one can speak from the individual fields of science without dilettantism and with full mastery of what modern science is, to the renewal of science, precisely to lead beyond those boundaries that are not felt theoretically as boundaries, but that are felt as boundaries, that show up as unsatisfactory, as insufficient in the practical way science works in life.

In the fall, we were then able to show how spiritual science can have a stimulating effect on the individual sciences and branches of practical life and art. And those who gathered in large numbers — more than a thousand people were present at the opening of these courses — were able to see what this Goetheanum itself represents as an external structure. Where else would one have built such a university? If one had needed a special building in which to pursue this or that spiritual life or to pursue science, one would have called upon an architect; one would have had a Greek, a Romanesque, a Gothic or a Renaissance building designed, or something else. That was not possible in Dornach with our free university, the Goetheanum. There, out of the same soul impulses that were to be spoken and researched there, one also had to build, sculpt and paint. And so one sees in this Goetheanum, which is admittedly a first attempt — the first lift cannot be anything else — a new architectural style. For that which is spiritual science is not a one-sided culture of the head, it is something that engages all branches of practical life. It is something that, without becoming didactic or pedagogical or symbolic or corny allegorical, will also inspire artistic creativity. What is proclaimed from the podium as spiritual science, what is communicated there in ideas, in thoughts, in scientific results, comes from the same source of soul life as the columns are built from, the ceiling is painted from, and the figures that are sculpted are created from. Sometimes we speak of the living spiritual life through words, at other times through the forms of architecture or sculpture or through painting and so on. Spiritual science is something that comes from the full human being, but through this it can also intervene in all branches of human life.

There have been many people willing to make sacrifices who have supported us so far that we have been able to take this project to the point it has reached so far. It is with a sense of melancholy that we realize how much remains to be done and how many people are needed who understand the matter if this building is to be completed. But we want what is meant by this building to speak urgently to the souls of men.

And we have not stopped at what the Dornach building merely is, but we have also moved on to practical institutions, especially in the field of education. And today I can only briefly mention this – I will be discussing on the 24th what practical institutions have emerged from anthroposophically oriented spiritual science for practical life itself – I can only briefly mention that the Waldorf School has been founded in Stuttgart as a creation of Emil Molt, and that I am leading it according to the educational-didactic impulses that can flow from spiritual science. This Waldorf School, despite its short existence, has achieved successes in the educational and teaching fields, which I will also talk about on the 24th of the month. Then we proceeded to form what are purely practical institutions, economic institutions, out of the spirit of spiritual science. For it must be shown everywhere that spiritual science does not mean an unworldly, remote spiritual life to which one can ascend when one finds earthly life too bad. Rather, spiritual science is meant to permeate the spirit so that it can be carried into all material things, including economic material things, so that everything becomes spiritualized and thus truly practical. I will have more to say about this on the 24th of the month. Then I will speak about education and teaching issues and about practical life from the point of view of anthroposophical spiritual science.

Today I just wanted to discuss what the direction, the actual spirit and meaning of this spiritual science are, and how this spirit and meaning of spiritual science accommodates the searching souls of the present day. And however much this soul searching has been decried as fantasy, as folly , humanity will have to learn from the catastrophic events of the present, from all the things that so clearly express the mood of decline and fatigue today, from all the things that are heralding in modern civilization as that which leads modern civilization into decadence , from all this humanity will have to learn that the seeking souls are on the right path – and of these seeking souls, those who seek in the whole of the rest of the universe that which must be experienced there in the innermost being as the deepest and most significant; who seek the spirit in spirit. Because, dear attendees, no matter how much one may deny the spirit, in the end, through reaction, what must emerge from this denial is the conviction that humanity cannot be without spirit in the long run, because the innermost depths of the soul need the spirit! And that which the soul needs so much, that is what anthroposophically oriented spiritual science wants to seek, albeit today with weak forces.

Answering questions

Question: Is it really inhibiting to search for ancient wisdom in the sense of earlier times because we have become different people within the present civilization?

Rudolf Steiner: That is absolutely the case, my dear attendees. Today, there is indeed a widespread yearning for the renewal of ancient wisdom. When one stands before humanity with something like anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, which draws from the very sources of today's soul life and, from an external point of view, arrives at many things that are similar to what was known to the ancients, people come and say, “Why not the old?” That many people cannot imagine anything different absolutely contradicts the meaning of human development.

Let us look at the matter from a point of view that can explain a lot: Suppose someone wanted to seek satisfaction for their soul without prejudice to what I have just said, simply by applying, say, ancient Indian wisdom in modern yoga philosophy or the content of Vedanta philosophy. What would happen to that soul? Something would arise that is simply not compatible with what this soul has become today, something that cannot be fully experienced by the soul of the modern human being. It is then the case that the person believes he has something to do with this old, warmed-up wisdom, but he does not get real soul content, but he gets a soul content that he cannot penetrate, and to which he actually only becomes intoxicated. We find such intoxication in people who unite in societies for the renewal of old wisdom. A certain inner untruthfulness then occurs in the soul. One believes to have something, but one cannot have it. And this inner dishonesty, even if it is not wanted at all, if it is striven for by the soul even in the most honest, consciously honest way, it still has a destructive effect on the soul life of the human being. It hollows out rather than filling it with a truly satisfying content.

One could also say that today, even if they do not participate in scientific life, people have already attained a certain kind of self-awareness through what they absorb at school. This self-awareness is dampened, tuned down, when one takes in an old world view, despite its beauty. One's consciousness is dampened and one does not arrive at a real understanding, but at a fantasizing, even if it sometimes looks more like dreaming. There is no reality in a soul that takes in something so old. These are things that can only be spoken from experience. Theoretically, one can of course believe that what was right for people in ancient times must still be right today. But I must say that it is rare to find the right understanding on this point.

I was once very pleased to be visited by an American clergyman in Berlin who had devoted much time to spiritual science. Unfortunately, he had already died, despite being still a young man, and so was torn away from his work in America. He addressed me immediately with the following words. He said: 'Today you speak of what you represent as anthroposophical spiritual science, what is in your books, for example in 'Geheimwissenschaft', in '' or otherwise in social views, of what is to come into the world as impulses. Do you believe that what you are giving now, in terms of content, as you are giving it now, must remain permanently?' I said, realizing very well that he was on the right track: “I don't think so. I am imbued with the recognition of human development that the spirit lives from eternity to eternity, but that what we express in our full humanity through the spirit, be it in religion, science or art, is in full development.” And so I believe that what I present as anthroposophically oriented spiritual science is the right thing for the present time, but that it is precisely because of this that it will have changed completely after a relatively short time – times are moving ever faster, after all – and will undergo completely different metamorphoses. From this question I saw that I was understood by this American quite well. One must have this feeling about it; it lies in the development of humanity. Question: What reasons do you have for assuming that no more was taught in earlier schools than has become known today?

Rudolf Steiner: I did not say that. Much more was taught in earlier schools than is now known. I believe that even what I have said today about the teaching in the old schools is unknown in the widest circles. What is known today — mainly in the style —, in the present direction of the world view questions, that is general education today. That is the significant thing. I gave the example of the heliocentric world view; one could give many such examples. If we go back to ancient cultures, we find everywhere – although we first have to understand the languages of the ancient cultures and overcome the prejudice that primitive man made up some kind of world view and did not let his experiences speak – we find everywhere the content of ancient world views that commands respect, more and more respect. It is precisely by becoming acquainted with the old Chaldean ideas of the world and other blossoms of old mental states, the Indian, Egyptian, Greek worldviews in their true form, in their deeper, fully human impulses, that one gains great respect for the old. But then, as a spiritual researcher, one also becomes familiar with those soul experiences. It is really not the case that one produces things out of one's imagination. I must say that I began with some of the research that I am presenting today thirty to thirty-five years ago, and only in recent years have I dared to express these things because I have worked on them in the meantime. Everything I have said about the threefold human being in my book 'Von Seelenrätsel' (The Soul's Enigma) is based on thirty to thirty-five years of research. There one comes across many things, which are then indeed investigated in a modern way, and which are connected to the modern soul life, but which in a certain way were present in vague instincts in old wisdom that is no longer useful to us. Then a great respect arises for what the ancients have achieved in a completely different way, what we rediscover today, but what we must seek in a completely different way today.

And I would like to say: What the ancients have achieved by instinct, we have lost by instinct. But what they have achieved beyond the threshold is the result of our ordinary education. We must develop out of a developed consciousness what the ancients had as world knowledge from their instinctual life. These are deep connections. If we know how to read it, outer history speaks on every page, and we are not satisfied with just any old meanings of words.

For example, what Indian wisdom is, can be translated as Deussen translated it. But then those who receive such translations do not get any idea of this Indian wisdom. But you can also imbibe it with your mind, then you learn to recognize that in the old Indian schools of wisdom, based on the philosophy of yoga, things were found that we have to seek in a different way, and that is what matters. We learn to recognize how people said to themselves: If we start from our ordinary consciousness, we are not very connected to the world. But if we start from the things that give us more than sense perceptions, if we delve into the breathing process, then, by following breathing inwardly and organically, the meaning of the world becomes clear to us in a completely different way. This was then recorded, which was understood as the meaning of the world in this way. We can no longer renew these yoga schools, and if we do, we will stifle the organism. For what has been revealed to people is, in its main features, general human education today. We must do something else. We must deepen that which we have appropriated more completely than the ancients, the intellectual culture, so that we can plant the intellect in the life of the feelings and will impulses; in this way we can reach deeper into human nature and into nature itself. In this way we arrive at the spiritual. We have to go a different way, a way of soul and spirit. And only by knowing what the path of the Indian world view actually was, can we understand what is communicated in the scriptures. Then, whenever we discover a supersensible truth in some other way, we can understand it in its earlier form, although the reverse is not the case. From such insights arises what I have said about the relationship between what is today general human education and what the ancient students were initiated into.

It is not possible in a lecture, which has already lasted too long, to give more than the guidelines. In the literature, however, you will find that every assertion made in such a lecture has always been turned around in terms of its evidence, and that it is indeed the case that most of the objections raised by spiritual researchers have already been raised by them in the most diverse ways.

That is what I wanted to say about the justification of such a judgment as I have given. It is entirely possible to say, on the basis of the apologetic traditions, that it is as I have explained it using the example of Aristarchus of Samos and the heliocentric worldview.

The subject I addressed last Monday here in Utrecht was the question of how anthroposophically oriented spiritual science can provide a method, a scientific path for penetrating the spiritual, supersensible world.

I have pointed out how it is only possible to penetrate into this environment if man brings forth from this soul certain abilities and powers that indeed lie dormant in every soul, and if he lifts up what is ordinary knowledge to the level of vision; to a vision that, for example, comes to develop full awareness of what it means to have a soul-spiritual life independent of all corporeality. We know precisely through modern science - and with regard to the everyday life of the soul, this science is absolutely right - that this ordinary life of the soul is bound to the instrument of the body. And only spiritual scientific methods can tear the spiritual-soul life away from the body, can thereby penetrate to the being in the human being that dwells in the spiritual world before it has united with a physical body through conception or birth, that passes through the gate of death, discards the human body and again consciously enters a spiritual world.

And I continued last Monday by saying that anyone who makes such an acquaintance with man's own supersensible being is also able to perceive, behind nature's sensuality and behind everything that can be explored with the ordinary mind, a supersensible environment, an environment of spiritual beings.

What is recognized in this way as the spiritual and soul life in man, what is recognized as the spiritual essence of the world in which we live, is what actually enables us to gain a true knowledge of the human being.

Over the last three to four centuries, we have acquired a complete natural science, but we have not been able to draw any knowledge about human beings from this natural science. In developmental theory, we start from the lowest living creatures. We ascend to the human being; we regard him, so to speak, as the end link in the animal series. We learn what humans have in common with other organisms, but we do not learn what humans actually are in the world as a separate being. We can only learn this through anthroposophically oriented spiritual science. And what asserts itself in this way in knowledge ultimately also asserts itself in the feelings and impulses that modern humanity has developed in social life.

Just think how many people who, through modern technology, have developed as a new class of people, through the whole modern economy - actually under the influence of certain socialist theories - believe that what lives in people as morality, as science, as religion, as art, is not drawn from an original spiritual source, but that it is only drawn from what economic, material processes are. The theory professed by modern social democracy, the theory that has sought to become reality in such a destructive way in Eastern Europe, this theory basically sees the forces that rule history as being outside of the human. And what man brings forth in art, custom, law, religion, that appears only as a kind of smoke. People call it a superstructure that rises up on the substructure. It is like a smoke that comes out of the purely economic-material. There, too, in this placing of the human being in the practical world, the actual human being is extinguished. If we are to characterize what modern education and the modern social consciousness have brought about, we cannot say otherwise than: the human being has been extinguished.

What spiritual science, as it is meant here, is to bring to humanity again is the knowledge of the human being, the appreciation of the human being, the connection of the human being as a supersensible being to the supersensible, universal being of the world.

And only with this do we stand in true reality. Only with this do we stand on ground that leads into a truly practical life. This is what I would like to substantiate today, first in the question of education and teaching. And here, in the way it has emerged from the School of Spiritual Science in Dornach, this anthroposophically oriented spiritual science has from the very beginning been conceived not as something unworldly and far removed from the world, but as something thoroughly realistic and practical. And one of the first practical foundations was in the field of education with the Free Waldorf School, which Emil Molt founded in Stuttgart and which I myself have the educational and didactic responsibility for. In this Free Waldorf School, the impulses of a true knowledge of the human being that can flow from anthroposophically oriented spiritual science are developed pedagogically and didactically.

For a long time people have been talking about the fact that education and teaching should not graft this or that into the child's soul, but rather develop what is in the human being out of the human soul. But when it is expressed in this way, it is, of course, initially only an abstract principle. The point, however, is not to have this principle intellectually, to extract something from the human soul, but to be able to truly observe the developing human soul in the child. And for that, one must first develop a sense for it. This sense is only developed by someone who is aware of how the actual individuality of the human being, the actual spiritual-soul entity from a spiritual world in which it has lived for a long time, descends; how from day to day, from week to week, from year to year, in all that develops physically and psychically in the child, a supersensible element lives; how we, as educators, as teachers, have been entrusted with something from a supersensible world that we have to unravel. When we see from day to day how the child's physiognomic traits become clearer and clearer, when we can decipher how a spiritual-soul element, sent down to us from the spiritual world, gradually unravels and reveals itself in these physiognomic traits , it is important to develop, above all, a sense of reverence for the supersensible human being descending from the spiritual worlds as the basis of a pedagogical-didactic art.

Anthroposophically oriented spiritual science makes it possible to observe the child's development from year to year. First of all, I would like to show the main stages of human development.

It is often said that nature or the world does not make any leaps. Such things are constantly repeated without actually looking at what they are supposed to mean. Does not nature constantly make leaps when it develops the green leaf and then, as if with a leap, the sepal and the colored petal and then again the stamens and so on? And so it is with human life. For the person who, unbiased by all the stimuli and impulses that anthroposophically oriented spiritual science can give him, observes this developing human life in the child, he finds, above all, not out of mystical grounds, but out of faithful observation, a leap in development around the seventh year, when the child begins to get the second teeth. Here we see how our knowledge of the soul, as it is currently used in science, has basically become somewhat exaggerated. Unless one has become completely materialistic, one differentiates between body and soul. But one speaks of the relationship between body and soul in an extraordinarily abstract way. One does not get used to observing in this field with the same kind of faithful and unprejudiced observation as one has learned in natural science. In natural science, for example, one learns that when heat appears through some process, and one has not added it, this heat was in some other form in the body. In physics one says “latent”. One says that the latent heat has been released. This attitude, which is provided by natural science, must also be adopted for the science of man, which, however, must then be spiritualized in relation to natural science. Thus, one must observe carefully: What then changes in the human being when he passes the age of changing teeth?

Now, if we really have the necessary impartiality for observation, we can see how the child, when it passes the age of seven, actually only begins to have outlined, contoured ideas, whereas before that it had no such ideas. We can see how it is only with this period that the possibility of thinking in actual thoughts, however childlike they may be, begins. We see how something emerges from the child's soul that was previously hidden in the human organism. Anyone who has acquired a spiritual eye for this matter can see how the child's soul life changes completely when the second dentition begins; how something emerges from the deepest, most hidden part of the soul and comes to the surface. Where did it come from, this thinking that now appears as a definite life of ideas? It was there as a principle of growth in the human being; permeating the organism; living as a spiritual-soul element in the growth that then comes to an end when the teeth are pushed out from within and replace the earlier teeth. When an end is put to this growth, which finds its conclusion in the change of teeth, then, so to speak, only one growth remains, for which less intensive forces are necessary. We see, then, how that which later becomes thinking in the child was once an inward organic growth force, and how this organic growth force is metamorphically transformed and comes to light as soul power.

By adopting this approach, we arrive at a science of the soul that is not clichéd, which, when it comes down to it, is simply transposed into the spiritual and is based on the same methods as those on which natural science is also based. Just as natural science is a faithful observation of a physical nature, so in order to understand the human being, a faithful observation is necessary, but now of the soul and spirit. If one learns to see through the human being in this way, then this way of looking at the human being is transformed into an artistic way of looking. It is indeed the case that today people often say, when someone expresses something like I just did: Yes, one should just look at something scientifically, in terms of knowledge; one should stick to sober logic; one should work through the intellect to arrive at abstractly formulated natural laws. This may be a comfortable human demand. It may appear to man that he would like to grasp everything in the wide-meshed logic of concepts in order to get to the bottom of things. But what if nature does not proceed in this way? What if nature works artistically? Then it is necessary that we follow her on her artistic path with our capacity for knowledge. Anyone who looks into nature and the world in general will perceive that what we bring about in natural laws through sober logic bears the same relation to the whole, full, intense reality as a drawing made with charcoal strokes does to a painting done in full color.

Anthroposophically oriented spiritual science draws from the full physical and spiritual reality. Therefore, it transforms mere logical recognition into artistic comprehension. But this also enables one to turn the teacher, the instructor, the educator into a pedagogical-didactic artist who acquires a fine sense for every single expression of the child's life. And indeed it is the case that every child has their own particular, individual way of expressing themselves. These cannot be registered in an abstract pedagogical science, but they can be grasped if one receives anthroposophically oriented impulses from the fullness of humanity and thereby gains an intuitive view of the spiritual and soul life in the human being, which then has an effect on the physical and bodily life. For what works roughly as the power of thought before the change of teeth in the growth of the child, we see more finely as a spiritual-soul activity in the child. As teachers and educators, we must pursue this from day to day with an artistic sense, then we will be able to be for the child what a real educator, a real teacher should be for the child.

I would like to give a brief description of how the first period of life, from birth to the change of teeth, and the second period of life, from the change of teeth to sexual maturity, now emerges.

In the first period, from the first to the seventh year of life, the human being is primarily an imitative being. But we must understand this in the fullest sense of the word. The human being enters the world and gives himself completely to his surroundings. In particular, he develops what he initially brings to light as his impulses of will and instinct in such a way that he imitates what is around him. Language, too, is initially learned in such a way that it is based on imitation. Between birth and the age of seven, the child is entirely an imitator. This must be taken into account. In such matters, one must be able to draw the right conclusions. If you associate with the world in these matters, people sometimes come to you for advice on one matter or another. For example, a father once told me that he had a complaint about his five-year-old child. “What did the five-year-old child do?” I asked. “He stole,” said the father sadly. “But then you have to first understand what theft actually is.” He told me that the child had not stolen out of ill will. He had taken money from his mother's drawer and bought sweets, but then distributed them to other children on the street. So it was not blind selfishness. What was it then? Well, the child had seen his mother take the money out of the drawer day after day. At the age of five, the child is an imitator. It did not steal, it simply imitated the things that its mother does day after day, because the child instinctively regards what its mother always does as the right thing to do. - This is just one example of all the subtle things one needs to know if one is to understand the art of education in a way that truly corresponds to the human being.

But we also know that children play at imitating. Basically, the play instinct is not something original, but an imitation of what is seen in the environment. If we look with unbiased eyes, we can see that imitation is at the root of play. But every child plays differently. The teacher of a small child before the age of seven must acquire a careful judgment about this, and one necessarily has to have an artistic sense to make such a judgment, because it is different for each child. Basically, each child plays in its own way. And the way a child plays, especially in the fourth, fifth, or sixth year, goes down into the depths of the soul as a force. The child grows older, and at first we do not notice how one or other of the special ways of playing comes to light in the child's later character traits. The child will develop other powers, other soul abilities; what was the special essence of his play slips into the hidden part of the soul. But it comes to light again later, and in a peculiar way, between the ages of twenty-five and thirty, in the period of life when the human being has to find his way into the outer world, into the world of outer experience, of outer destinies. Some people adapt to this world skillfully, others awkwardly. Some people come to terms with the world in such a way that they derive a certain satisfaction from their own actions in relation to the world; others cannot intervene with their actions here or there, and they have a difficult fate.

You have to get to know the life of the whole person, you have to see how, in a mysterious way, the sense of play comes out again in this sense of life in the twenties. Then you will gain an artistically oriented idea of how to direct and guide the play instinct, so that you can give something to the person for a later period of life.

Today's pedagogy often suffers from abstract principles. By contrast, anthroposophically oriented spiritual science aims to give pedagogy an artistic-didactic sense, to work in the earliest youth in such a way that what is formed there is a dowry for the whole life of the human being. For anyone who wants to teach and educate children must get to know the whole of human life. The magnificent scientific development of the last few centuries has not taken this kind of knowledge of human nature into account. Consider the social significance of really being able to give children the kind of education I have described.

When the child has now changed its teeth, or at least has got them, the second epoch of the child's life begins. Then the actual school age sets in, that which one has to study particularly carefully if one wants to pursue pedagogy from the point of view of true human knowledge. While the child up to the age of seven is essentially an imitator, from the age of seven until sexual maturity, that is, from about the age of thirteen to sixteen, there develops (and this varies from individual to individual) what the unbiased observer recognizes as a natural urge to submit to an authority, a human authority, a teacher or educator. Today, it is a sad day when one hears from all sorts of political parties that some kind of democratic spirit should enter the school; that children should, to a certain extent, already practice a kind of self-government. With such things, which arise from all kinds of partisan views, one rebels against what human nature itself demands. Those who truly understand human nature know what it means for one's entire later life if, between the ages of seven and fifteen, one has been able to look up with devoted veneration to one or more human authorities; if one has called true that what these human authorities said was true; if one felt that what these human authorities felt was beautiful; if one found that what such revered personalities presented as good was also good. - Just as one imitates until the age of seven, so one wants to believe in what comes from authority until sexual maturity. This is the time when one must be open to the imponderable influences that can come from a soul, from a personality.

We founded the Free Waldorf School in Stuttgart. Many people say they would like to attend the Waldorf School to get to know something of the method and so on of this Waldorf School. Imagine a copperplate engraving of the Sistine Madonna, and someone cuts a piece out of it to get an idea of the Sistine Madonna. That would be the same as perhaps looking at what happens in the Waldorf School for a fortnight or three weeks. You wouldn't even see anything special. Because what happens in the Waldorf School is a result of anthroposophically oriented spiritual science. Those who are teachers there have acquired their artistic pedagogy and didactics from the impulses of anthroposophical spiritual science. If you want to get to know the Waldorf school, you have to get to know anthroposophically oriented spiritual science above all. But not in the way one gets to know it from the outside, where people are led to believe that it is some kind of complicated, nebulous mysticism, some kind of sectarianism; no, one has to get to know this anthroposophically oriented spiritual science from the inside, how it draws from the full humanity what the human being really is as a sensual and supersensible being within the world and within time.

These things do, however, lead one to perceive the supersensible nature of the working of such an authoritative personality. Let me give an example. One could imagine a picture – and it is best to speak in pictures to children from seven to fourteen years of age, especially up to the age of ten. Let us take any picture by which we want to teach the child an idea, a feeling, about the immortality of the soul. One can think up this picture. But one can also point out to the child the butterfly pupa, how the butterfly crawls out of the pupa. And one says to the child: the human body is like the pupa. The butterfly flies out of the chrysalis. When a human being dies, the immortal soul leaves the body as the butterfly leaves the chrysalis. It passes over into the spiritual world. There is much to be gained from such a picture. But a real intuitive perception of the immortality of the soul can only be conveyed to a child under very definite conditions. If, for example, a teacher thinks, “I am clever, the child is stupid, it must first become clever” – and the teacher thinks something like this in order to make the child understand something – then the teacher may perhaps achieve something, but what really brings the child to a sense of immortality will certainly not be achieved. For only that which one oneself believes, in which one oneself is completely immersed, has an effect on the child. Anthroposophically oriented spiritual science gives you the opportunity to say: I myself believe in this image; for me, this crawling out of the butterfly from the chrysalis is absolutely the one that I did not think up, but what nature itself presents at a lower level for the same fact that, at a higher level, is the emergence of the immortal soul from the body. If I myself believe in the picture, if I stand within the content of the picture, then my faith has the effect of awakening faith, imagination and feeling in the child. These things are absolutely imponderable.

What happens on the outside is not even as important as what takes place between the feelings of the teacher and those of the pupil. It matters whether I go into the school with noble thoughts or ignoble ones, and whether I believe that simply what I say is what has an effect. I will give what I say a nuance that does not affect the soul if I do not enter the classroom with noble thoughts and, above all, with thoughts that are true to what I am saying. - That, first of all, about the relationship between the pupil and the teacher in the second epoch of life from the seventh to the fifteenth year. There would be much more to say about this, but I will only highlight a few specific points so that you can get to know the whole spirit that inspires the pedagogy and didactics that flow from anthroposophically oriented spiritual science.

Then we started at the Waldorf school with really bringing out what the child should learn. We are faced with very significant questions, especially when we take the child into primary school. We have to teach the child to read and write; but when it comes to what lives in the human being, writing, the printed word, has long since become something quite abstract within human civilization, something that has taken on the nature of a sign and is no longer intimately connected with the full, original, elementary soul life of the human being. The external history of civilization does provide some information about such things, although only to a limited extent. If we go back to the various cultures, we find pictographic writing, where, however, what was fixed externally was pictorially recorded, which is what was actually meant. In older cultures, writing had not been developed to the point of the mere sign being as abstract as it is today. In fact, when we teach reading and writing in the usual way, we introduce something to the child that is not initially related to his nature. Therefore, a pedagogy and didactics that is truly based on a full knowledge of the human being will not teach reading and writing as it is usually done. Instead, we start from the child's artistic nature in our method. We do not begin with reading at all, not even with writing in the usual sense of the word, but with a kind of painting-drawing, drawing-painting. We lead the child to learn to form letters not only from the head, but from the whole human being, bringing lines and forms, even in colored drawing, onto paper or some other surface; lines and forms that naturally emerge from the human organism. Then we gradually introduce what has been taken from the artistic into the letter forms, first through writing, and from writing we only then move on to reading. That is our ideal. It may be difficult to implement in the early days, but it is an ideal of a true didactics that follows from a full knowledge of the human being. And as in this case, the essence of human nature is the basis for all education and teaching.

We start, for example, from the child's musical and rhythmic abilities because these flow from human nature and because we know that a child who is properly stimulated in a musical way around the age of seven experiences a particular strengthening and hardening of the will through this musical instruction.

Now, we try to teach the child in pictorial form what is to be taught to the child, so that the child is not introduced too early into an intellectualized life. We also note that there is an important turning point between the ninth and tenth to eleventh year of the child's life. Anyone who can observe childhood in the right way knows that between the ages of nine and eleven, there is a point in a child's development that, depending on how it is recognized by the educator and teacher, can influence the fate, the inner and often also the outer destiny of the person in a favorable or unfavorable sense. Up to this point, the child does not isolate itself much from its surroundings, and it must be borne in mind that a plant described by a child before the age of nine must be described differently than afterwards. Before this time, the child identifies itself with everything around it; then it learns to distinguish; only then does the concept of the self actually arise – before that, it only had a sense of self. We must observe how the child behaves, how it begins to formulate certain questions differently from this point on. We must respond to this important point in time for each individual child, because it is crucial for the whole of the following life.

We must also be aware, for example, that subjects such as physics and the like, which are completely separate from the human being and only attain a certain perfection by excluding everything subjective from the formulation of their laws, may only be introduced to the child from the age of eleven or twelve. On the other hand, we teach our children the usual foreign languages in a practical way right from the beginning of primary school. We see how, by not teaching a foreign language by translation but by letting the child absorb the spirit of the other language, the child's entire soul structure is indeed broadened. This is how an artistic didactics and pedagogy is formed out of this spirit. I could go on talking here for another eight days about the design of such a pedagogy and didactics as art. But you can see how what comes from anthroposophically oriented spiritual science flows directly into the practical side of education.

And how does this apply to the individual teacher? It applies in such a way that he actually gets something different from this anthroposophically oriented spiritual science than can be obtained from the rest of today's scientific education. And here we touch on one of the most significant social issues of the present day.

The social question is said to be the fundamental question of our time, but it is usually understood only as an external economic question, not really grasped in its depth. This depth only comes to mind when one becomes aware of how, in the broad masses of today's proletariat, one word can be heard again and again. That word is ideology. What does the modern proletarian mean when he speaks of ideology, according to his Marxist instruction? He means: When we develop any ideas about custom, law, art, religion, it is not something real in itself, it is only an abstraction, it is only an unreal idea. Everything we have in this way is not reality, it is an ideology. Reality is only the external, material production processes.

From this fact one can sense the radical change that has taken place in human development in terms of world view and state of mind. Consider the basic tenet of ancient Oriental wisdom. Last time I spoke here, I said that we should not long for the past, but there are many things we can take from it for our own orientation. The ancient Oriental spoke of Maja. What did Maja mean in the ancient Orient? It meant everything that man can recognize in the external sense world. For reality was that which lived within him, which sprouted within as custom, religion, art, science. That was reality. What the eyes saw, what the ears heard, what one otherwise perceived, that was Maja. Today, in the Orient, only a decadent form of that which, from a certain point of view, can be characterized as I have just done, is present. Our broad masses of people have come to the opposite through Marxist guidance. One could say that the development of humanity has taken a complete turn. The external, the sensual, is the only reality, and that which is formed within, custom, religion, science, art, is Maya. Only one does not say Maya, but one says ideology. But if one were to translate Maja in a general sense, then one would have to translate it with ideology, and if one wanted to translate into the language of the old world view of the Orient what the modern proletarian means by ideology, then one would have to translate it with Maja, only that the application is the opposite.

I mention this because I want to show what an enormous turn human development has taken, how we in the West have in fact developed the final consequences of a world view that runs directly counter to what is still contained in the Orient in a decadent way. Those who are able to observe the conflicts of humanity from such depths know what potential for conflict exists between East and West today. Things appear differently in the various historical epochs; but however materialistic the striving of today's East may be, in a certain way it is the striving that was also present in ancient Buddhism and the like, which has now become decadent. And our Western culture has undergone a complete turnaround in relation to this. We have now arrived at a point where broad masses of people do not speak of the fact that spiritual reality fills them within, but that everything that fills them within is only Maya, ideology.

This is what anthroposophically oriented spiritual science gives back to humanity: not just thoughts that can be seen as ideology, not just unrealities; but man is again filled with what he was filled with at that time, with the consciousness: Spirit lives in my thoughts. The spirit enters into me; not a dead, ideological spirit, but a living spirit lives in me. To lead people back to the direct experience of the living spirit is what anthroposophically oriented spiritual science wants to give. This is then what is incorporated into anthroposophical pedagogy and didactics. This is what should live in the teacher's dealings with the pupil.

But it is also that which is directly involved in dealing with the social question. Those people who talk about ideology today have gone through our schools. But we need a humanity that actually develops social impulses from the very depths of its being. This humanity must emerge from other schools. What has emerged from the schools we so admire has led to the social chaos we see today. We need a humanity that has been educated in such a way that the education corresponds to a real, comprehensive knowledge of the human being. This is what makes the question of education a universal social question. Either we will have to decide to see the question of education in this sense as a social question, or we will be blind to the great social demands of the present.

But we must sense what is necessary for the teacher, for the educator, in order to practise such an education, in order to allow knowledge of the human being to be transformed into a pedagogical-didactic art. We must sense that this is only possible if the teacher, the educator, does not need to follow any other norm than the norm that is within his or her own inner being. The teacher and educator must be answerable to the spirit that he experiences. This is only possible within the threefold social organism, in a free spiritual life. As long as the spiritual life is dependent on the economic life on the one hand and on the state life on the other, the teacher is in the thrall of the state or of economic life. You will find, when you study the connections, what this thrall consists of.

In truth, one can only establish a surrogate for a free school today. It was possible in Württemberg to establish the Waldorf School as a free school in which only the demands of the pedagogical art prevail, before socialism created the new school law.

If freedom is to prevail, then every teacher must be directly involved in the administration; then the most important part of spiritual life - like all spiritual life, in fact - must have its free self-government. One cannot imagine a spiritual life in which such free schools are common other than in such a way that from the teacher of the lowest elementary school class to the highest teacher, everything falls into corporations that are not subordinate to any state or economic authorities and that do not receive instructions from any side. What happens in the administration must be such that every teacher and instructor needs only so much time to teach or instruct that he still has so much time left to help administer. Not those who have retired or who have left the field of teaching and education, but those who are currently teaching and educating should also be the administrators. Hence the authority of the capable arises as a matter of course. Just try self-administration and you will find that because you need someone who can really achieve something, their authority will naturally assert itself. If the spiritual life administers itself, it will not be necessary to use this authority or the like. Just let this free spiritual life develop and you will see that because people need the capable, they will also find them.

I have only been able to sketch out the issues here, but you will have seen how a truly artistic approach to education requires a free spiritual life. We can see how it is necessary to first separate the free spiritual life from the entire social organism.

Just as Karl Marx or Proudhon or other bourgeois economists base what they want to base, so one does not base things of life experience, things of life practice. What is said in my book “The Key Points of the Social Question” or in other writings on the threefold social organism is based on decades of all-round observation of life, and is spoken and written from practice. Therefore, one cannot grasp it with lightly-draped concepts. I know exactly where one can easily start a logical critique. But what has just been taken from reality is as multifaceted as reality itself. And just as little as reality can be captured in lightly-draped logical concepts, so little can something that is supposed to fit reality be captured in such concepts. But anyone who has ever inwardly felt what it means to be in school, in class, in education, as it is necessary to do so through a true understanding of the developing human being, the child, has, in their feeling, in the whole experience, full proof that the spiritual life must be given its free administration. And all the objections do not apply, so that one simply raises them, but only so that one must eliminate them through reality.

Then people come and say: If spiritual life is to be based on free recognition, people will not send their children to school, so you cannot establish a free spiritual life. — That is not what someone who thinks realistically says. Above all, he feels the full necessity of liberating spiritual life. He says: spiritual life must be freed; it may perhaps have the disadvantage that some people do not want to send their children to school; then one must think of means to prevent this from happening. One must not treat this as an objection, but one must raise such a thing and then think about how it can be remedied. In many things that concern the full reality of life, we will have to learn to think like this.

They sense that a complete turnaround must occur, especially with regard to intellectual life – and public intellectual life is, after all, essentially provided in its most important parts through teaching and education. Those who are accustomed to working in today's intellectual life will not go along with these things. I know that certain teachers at secondary schools, when they were approached with the suggestion of moving towards self-management, said: I would rather be under the minister than manage with colleagues; it's not possible. I am less likely to be with my colleagues from the faculty than with the minister, who is outside.

Perhaps one will not exactly get the necessary impetus in this direction. But just as, with regard to the big questions of life today, it is not the producer but the consumer who is becoming more and more decisive, so one would like the consumers of the educational system to reflect on what is necessary in the teaching and educational system as the most important public part of intellectual life. These are, above all, people who have children. We have seen the impression that parents have gained from the end of the school year, from everything else that children have experienced during the school year at the Waldorf School. We have seen how, when these children come home, their parents have realized that a new social spirit is actually emerging that is of tremendous importance for the next generation — provided, of course, that the Waldorf School does not remain a small school in a corner of Stuttgart, but that this spirit, which prevails there, already becomes the spirit of the widest circles.

But it is not only parents who are interested in what goes on in schools and educational institutions. Basically, every person who is serious about human development has an interest in it. Every human being must care about the next generation. Those who think this way and who have a sense of how we need a spiritual renewal today, as I explained in the last lecture here in Utrecht, should become interested in this new education that can be achieved through the school system from the lowest to the highest levels.

At the School of Spiritual Science in Dornach, we are trying to establish an educational institution in the highest sense of the word, based on this spirit. We still have a hard time of it today. We can give people renewal and inspiration in the individual specialized sciences; we can give them something like our autumn courses were, like our Easter courses will be. We can show them how, for example, medicine, but also all the other sciences of practical life, can receive through anthroposophically oriented spiritual science what is necessary for the present and especially for the near future.

But for the time being we can give nothing but spirit, and that is not yet highly valued today. Today, people still value the testimonies that we cannot yet give. We must fight for what is recognized as a necessity for the development of humanity and for the near future to become official. This can only come about if a mood develops in the widest international circles for what I would call a kind of world school association. Such a world school association need not limit itself to founding lower or higher schools, but should include all impulses that lead to something like what has been attempted in Dornach in a certain special way. Such a world school association would have to embrace all those people who have an interest in the forces of ascent entering into the developmental forces of humanity in the face of the terrible forces of descent that we have in humanity today. For such a world school association would not become a kind of federation from the impulses that are already there; it would not try to shape the world according to the old diplomatic or other methods. Such a union, such a world school association would try to form a world union of humanity out of the deepest human forces, out of the most spiritual human impulses. Such a union would therefore mean something that could really give a renewal of that life, which has shown its fragility so much in the terrible years of the second decade of the 20th century.

The people who are educated there will have the social impulses, and they will be the ones who can develop the right strength in the other areas of social life, in the area of an independent legal or state or political life and in the area of an independent economic life. Just as a free spiritual life can only be built on objectivity and expertise, and not on what comes to the fore through the majority, economic life can only be beneficial for humanity if it is separated from all majority rule, from all those areas in which people judge simply from their humanity, not from their knowledge of the subject or field. In economic life we need associations where people who belong to the sphere of consumption, people who belong to the sphere of production, and people who belong to the sphere of trade, join together. I have shown in my writings that these associations, by their very nature, will have a certain size. Such associations can truly provide that in economic life which I would call a collective judgment, just as it is true [on the other hand] that in spiritual life everything must come from the human personality. For through birth we bring with us our gifts from the spiritual world. Every time a human being is born, a message comes down from the spiritual world into the physical world. We have to take it in, we have to look at the human individuality; the teacher at the human individuality in the child, the whole social institution at the free spiritual life, in which the teacher is so situated that he can fully live out his individuality.

What can turn out to be a blessing for humanity in this free spiritual life would turn out to be a disaster in economic life. Therefore, we should not have any illusions. As much as we have to strive for a comprehensive and harmonious judgment through our individuality in spiritual life, we can do so much less in economic life. There we are only able to form a judgment together with the other people, to form a judgment in associations. One knows, by having worked, in a certain area, but what one knows there is one-sided under all circumstances. A judgment comes about only by not merely dealing theoretically with the others, but by having to supply a certain commodity to the other, to satisfy certain needs for the other, to conclude contracts. When the real interests face each other in contracts, then the real, expert judgments will form.

And what is basically the main thing in economic life is also formed from what works within the associations: the right price level. You can read all this in more detail in my books “The Key Points of the Social Question” and “In the Execution of the Threefold Order”, as well as in the journals. There is even a Dutch magazine about threefolding. There you can read about how a collective judgment must be sought in economic life. Since we have had a world economy instead of the old national economies in economic life, it has become necessary for the organization of economic life to be based on free economic points of view, for economic life to be lived out in associations that deal only with economic matters, but in such a way that majorities are not decisive anywhere, but rather expertise and professional competence are decisive everywhere. The result will be a division of labor. Those who have the necessary experience or other reasons will be in the right place. This will happen naturally in the associations, because we are not dealing with abstract definitions but with the activity of a contract. For example, if an article is being overproduced in a particular area, it must be ensured that people are employed in other ways; because where this is the case, the article becomes too cheap, and the one that is underproduced becomes too expensive. The price can only be set when a sufficient number of people are employed by associations in a particular area. If such a thing is to become real, it requires an intense interest in the entire economic life of humanity. It is a matter of developing, not merely as an empty phrase, what is called human brotherhood, but of bringing about this human fraternization in associations in the economic sphere.

Today I can only sketch out the main lines. The literature on threefolding already discusses the details. But what I want to suggest is only how spiritual science oriented to anthroposophy can practically take hold of life here as well.

And so, in the social organism, we have on the one hand the free spiritual life based on the human individuality; on the other, economic life based on associations that come together to form the global economy as a whole – without taking into account the political state borders, which today contradict economic interests. This may still be uncomfortable for some people to think, but it is what can bring about change from the chaotic conditions.

Between the two, the free spiritual life and the associative economic life, stands the actual political life, the actual state life, where majority decisions have their justification; where everything, including human work, comes up for negotiation, for which every mature person is competent. In the free life of the spirit, not every mature person is competent; here, majority decisions could only spoil everything, as they can in economic life. But there are, for example, the nature and measure of work, of human work; there are areas where every human being, when mature, is competent, where one person stands before another as an equal. This is the actual state-judicial, political area in the threefold social organism. This is what spiritual life is already pointing to most clearly today, but it can also be pursued in the other areas of social existence in accordance with the demands and necessities.

Threefold social organism: a free spiritual life, based on the full and free expression of the individual human personality; a legal or state life that is truly democratic, where people face each other as equals and where majorities decide, because only in this link of the social organism does it come to a decision on which every adult person is competent; an economic life that is built on associations, which in turn decides on the basis of factual and technical knowledge, where the contract applies, not the law.

There are people who say that this would destroy the unity of the social organism. For example, someone objected to me that the social organism is a unified whole and must remain so, otherwise everything would be torn apart. At that time I could only answer the objection: A rural family is also a unit. But if one claims that the state must also manage the economy and administer the schools, then one could also claim that a rural household, which is also a unit with master and mistress and maid and cow, because the whole is a unit, everyone should give milk, not just the cow. The unity would arise precisely from the fact that each one does the right thing in its place. The unity arises precisely from the fact that the three links arise. One should just not rush into a matter that is based on correct observation of those things that are pressing for transformation in contemporary social life, based on a partial or incomplete understanding.

Liberty, equality, fraternity – these are the three great ideals that resound from the 18th century. What human heart would not have felt deeply about the three ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity. Nevertheless, there were always clever people in the course of the 19th century who constructed a contradiction between freedom and equality: How could one be free if, after all, all people had to develop their abilities to the same extent and how that was also not true of fraternity? — Much clever and concise things have been said in favor of the contradictory nature of these three ideals. Nevertheless, we feel them and feel their justification. What is actually at issue here? Well, people have formed the three ideals of freedom, equality and fraternity out of the intense depths of the soul, and these are truly as justified as anything historical and human can be justified. But for the time being people remained under the suggestion of the unitary state. In the unified state, however, these three ideals contradict each other. Nevertheless, they must be realized. Their realization will lead to the tripartite social organism. If one realizes that this is something that can be started tomorrow, that it is thought out and formed out of practice, that it does not remotely have a utopian character like most social ideas, that it is thoroughly practical, if one realizes how the unity state today, out of itself, creates the necessity to divide itself into three parts: then one will also understand the historical and human significance of the three great ideals that have been resonating in humanity since the 18th century. Then we will say to ourselves: the threefold social organism is what first consolidates these three ideals, it is what gives these three ideals the possibility of life. In conclusion, let me express, as a summary of what I wanted to say today about the practical development of anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, how it must come about in humanity: the threefold social organism, Spiritual life administered for itself, economic life administered for itself, and in the middle the state-legal-political life administered for itself. Then, in a genuine, true sense, humanity will be able to realize itself: freedom in spiritual life, equality in democratic state life, brotherhood in associatively shaped economic life.

Answering questions

Question: How can we differentiate in the spiritual-scientific field between human and animal blood? The I expresses itself in human blood, but not in animal blood?

Rudolf Steiner: Yes, the materialistic way of thinking, which had been in preparation since the middle of the 15th century, but which became particularly strong in the 19th century and developed into the 20th, has gradually caused the sense of it to die away, that the external expression [of a thing] is not decisive for the inner structure and for the whole context [in which it stands]. I have to refer to some of this, which of course I cannot explain in detail today. You can find it in the spiritual scientific literature, but I have to say a few words about the question.

We have to distinguish between the physical body, which can be seen with the eyes and which is also considered in ordinary science through anatomy and physiology, for example. We then distinguish the etheric or life body, which we become aware of when we observe something like the release of thinking during the change of teeth; this is how we get to know the life of the etheric body. We must not confuse this with the old, hypothetical life force; it has nothing to do with it. This is the result of direct observation. Then we learn to recognize what part of the soul governs this etheric body, what one can call the soul organism, and the actual I.

These four members, however, express themselves in turn in the physical. For example, the etheric body has a particular effect on the glandular system, the I has a particular effect on the blood system in humans. Now one can raise such a question as the one asked here, but one must first acquire something that I would like to make clear through the following comparison. Imagine someone were to say: a knife is just a knife, it is used to cut meat. You cannot say that. Nor can you say: man has red warm blood, animals have red warm blood – the expression for the I. Suppose someone finds a razor and uses it to cut meat because it is a knife. It is not a matter of how something is outwardly and materially formed, but how it fits into a whole context. For an animal, the red warm blood is the expression of the soul organism; for a human being, the same red blood is the expression of the I, just as the razor is a knife for shaving and the knife on the table is a knife for cutting meat. One should not ask: What is blood as blood? It can be an expression for this in one context and for something else in another context.

Question: Is it also possible in other countries to establish schools like the Waldorf School?

Rudolf Steiner: Whether such schools can be founded in other countries depends on the laws of the country concerned. I have already expressed myself appropriately with regard to the Waldorf School. I said: Before the new democratic, republican school constitution came into being, it was possible to found the Waldorf School. Recent developments have been such that we are gradually forfeiting one freedom after another. And if we in Central Europe were to arrive at Leninism, then the Central Europeans would also get to know what the grave of human freedom means. But it depends everywhere on the laws in question whether you can found schools like the Waldorf School. So it depends entirely on the individual state laws. You can try to go as far as possible. Recently, for example, I was asked to appoint teachers for a kind of initial school in another place, and I said that we would of course have to do a trial first. I initially appointed two very capable teachers for the first class, but they had not taken an exam, so that people could see whether they could implement such teachers. It is certainly not out of the question in a Waldorf school to employ teachers who have not taken the exam. For example, when I was recently asked by a teacher whether it would be possible to employ her even though she had not yet passed her exams, but was on the exam list, I said: That doesn't matter; you will also have the exam one day.

Now, the point is to work towards a real liberation of the spirit and of school life on a large scale. For this, something like a world school association is needed. It must become possible that the question of whether schools like the Waldorf School can be established in different countries will no longer arise, but that this possibility will be created everywhere through the power of conviction of a sufficiently large number of people. We also experienced the same in other areas, as is also beginning today in the area of education. Many people do not agree with conventional medicine, so they turn to those who want to go beyond conventional medicine – not in a quackish way, but in a thoroughly appropriate way. I even met a minister of a Central European state who trumpeted the monopoly of conventional medicine in his parliament with all his might, but then came himself and wanted help in a different way. This is the striving, on the one hand, to leave what the feeling actually wants to overcome, but to leave it and to achieve the other through all possible back doors. We have to get beyond that. We don't have to want to set up private schools, but we have to create the opportunity everywhere to set up a free school in the sense described today. If we do not have the courage to do this, then those who understand these things will not allow themselves to be used to establish private schools or to appoint teachers for them. A great movement should arise in which every person who reflects on the tasks of the time should become a member, so that through the power of such a world federation, what could lead to the creation of such schools everywhere.

But above all, in the case of such a world school association - please allow me to mention this only in passing, in parentheses - a certain idealism in humanity must disappear, I mean the kind that says: Oh, spiritual things, anthroposophy, that's so high, the material must not approach it; it would defile anthroposophy if the material were to approach it. This idealism, which is so idealistic that it uses all kinds of phrases to describe the spiritual and elevates it to heaven, to a cloud-cuckoo-land, while keeping a firm hand on the purse, does not go together with the reasoning of a world school association or the like. Here one must muster an idealism that does not disdain the purse in order to do something for the ideals of humanity. Anthroposophically oriented spiritual science must think its way into practical life, that is, not just into the clouds, but also into the stock market. There are also nooks and crannies there that belong to practical life. —- That is just a characteristic of what a right worldview is.

Question: Are there contradictions between anthroposophical spiritual science and Protestant Christianity?

Rudolf Steiner: There is no need to construct contradictions. Two things must be distinguished: The Mystery of Golgotha is a fact: that a spiritual being from the supermundane worlds descended to earth and united with the man Jesus of Nazareth. This spiritual fact, which alone gives meaning to our earthly development, will be grasped in different ways by each age. Our age needs a new understanding of this fact. We can best grasp this fact if we learn to understand spiritual facts in general. Anyone who believes that some discovery, whether in the physical or spiritual realm, should somehow shake Christianity, thinks little of it. If the official representatives of Christianity, or rather of the traditional denominations, turn so fiercely against anthroposophy today, it only speaks against these official representatives, who do not really have true Christianity in mind, but the rule of their respective church. True Christianity has indeed grasped anthroposophical spiritual science, but only in a supersensible way, through supersensible knowledge. You can read more about this in my book 'Christianity as Mystical Fact' and in other writings.

Question: Does spiritual life have a kind of supremacy over the other two areas in the threefold social organism?

Rudolf Steiner: You can see in my book on “The Core Points of the Social Question” how capital is used in the threefold social organism. It enters into a kind of circulation, like blood in the human organism, and remains with the one who is best qualified to manage it and thus also manages it in the interest of the community. For this, however, spiritual life must constantly interact with the other limbs. This is the peculiar thing about such a natural structure of the social organism as the human organism. The human organism – and this is the result of thirty years of research for me – is tripartite by nature. Firstly, there is the nervous-sensory organism, which is mainly localized in the head; secondly, the rhythmic system, which is localized in the chest as breathing and blood circulation; and thirdly, the metabolic system, which is connected to the limbs. But these three limbs work together in such a way that, in a sense, the head is indeed leading, but in another sense, the other two limbs are leading as well. So one cannot say that something has supremacy, but precisely because of the way the three limbs are structured according to their essence, a harmonious wholeness will arise in the social organism. Question: Should children from seven to fourteen believe what the teacher says, or are they taught freely?

Rudolf Steiner: The nature of the human being demands what I have expressed in the lecture: a certain self-evident authority. This demand for a self-evident authority is based, in turn, on a certain development of human life as a whole. Certainly, no one can develop more feeling for the social rule of human freedom than I, who wrote my “Philosophy of Freedom” in 1892, which is intended to provide the foundations for a liberal, social human life. But still, if a person is to face life freely in the right way, he must develop a sense of authority within himself between the ages of seven and fifteen. If one does not learn to recognize others through this self-evident authority, then the later demand for freedom is something that leads precisely to the impossibility of life, not to true freedom. Just as man only comes to a true brotherhood if he is educated in the appropriate way, by being guided in the right way in his imitation in the childhood years until the seventh year, so the sense of authority is necessary if man is to become free. Everything that is said today about governing school communities in a republican form is only asserted out of party considerations. That would destroy human nature. I say this out of a thorough knowledge of the human being. Such a demand for a healthy, authoritative way of teaching between the ages of seven and fifteen must be made. Only objectivity can be considered. Buzzwords should not be the deciding factor. It is precisely those who stand on the ground of freedom who must demand an authoritative education for this age group.