Background to the Gospel of St. Mark
GA 124
12 December 1910, Munich
XI. Kyrios, The Lord of the Soul
In several lecture-courses given over the years in the different Groups and attended by many of the friends here to-day, we have endeavoured to study the Gospels of St. John, St. Luke and St. Matthew and the great event in Palestine, the Mystery of Golgotha, from three different points of view.
One result of these studies should have been to establish in our souls a growing realisation of the greatness of this unique event. We have understood that the reason why there are four Gospels is that their authors, writing as inspired occultists, each wished to describe the great event from a special angle, just as a photograph of an object is taken from a particular side. By combining the pictures, each taken from a different angle, an idea of the reality can be obtained. Each of the Evangelists makes it possible for us to study one aspect in particular of the great event in Palestine.
The Gospel of St. John gives us insight into the great events in Palestine by opening out a vista of the highest human goals and at the same time of the sublime realities of the spiritual worlds.
The Gospel of St. Luke unveils the mysteries connected with the personality of Jesus of Nazareth, with the Solomon Jesus and the Nathan Jesus, until the moment when the Christ descends into him.
The Gospel of St. Matthew, as those of you who heard the lectures will know and others will be able to read, shows how the bodily nature in which the Christ was to incarnate for three years was prepared by mysterious processes connected with the racial stock of the ancient Hebrew people.
In a certain respect the Gospel of St. Mark can lead us to supreme heights in our study of Christianity and give us insight into many matters communicated by the other Gospels but in a less dramatic way. And so this evening I will take the opportunity of saying something in reference to the Gospel of St. Mark.
We must realise how necessary it is to study many subjects with which superficial modern thought has no inclination to concern itself. If we are to understand the Gospel of St. Mark in its depths we must acquaint ourselves to some extent with the very different character of the language in which men expressed themselves at the time when Christ Jesus was on the Earth. Let me try to convey to you what I mean by using contrasts as it were of light and shadow.
We make use of language to express what we want to say and to reveal what lives in our souls. It is in the way in which language is used as a means of expressing the inner life of soul that the several epochs in the evolution of humanity differ radically from one another. If we go back to the ancient Hebrew epoch and to the wonderful modes of expression used in the temple-language, we find that there was a quite different way of clothing the secrets of the soul in words—a way undreamed of nowadays. In the old Hebrew language only the consonants were written, the vowels being inserted afterwards; and when a word was uttered the echoes of a whole world reverberated in it—not, as is the case to-day, some more or less abstract concept. The reason why the vowels were not written was that they were an indication of the speaker's inmost being, whereas the consonants were intended to depict external objects or conditions. For example, whenever an ancient Hebrew wrote the letter B—or what corresponded to our present B—it always evoked in him a sense of warmth and a picture of some outer condition, in this case something in which one could be enclosed, as in a shelter or a house. The sound B could not be uttered without this feeling as an accompaniment. Again, the sound A (ah) could not be uttered without conveying the impression or image of something inwardly powerful, of a radiating force. The content of the soul thus projected into words streamed out into space and into other souls. Language was therefore much more alive, much more related to the secrets of existence than is the case nowadays.
This is one side—the light side I wanted to convey. But there is also the other side—the shadow side—constituted by the fact that in the use of our language we have to a great extent become utterly shallow. Our language expresses only abstractions, generalisations. People no longer have any feeling about this but it could not be otherwise in times when language is used, even for literary purposes, before writers have any spiritual content to convey, when enormous masses of printed matter circulate everywhere, when everyone feels that he must write something and nothing is considered unsuitable as subject-matter. When our Society was founded I discovered that certain authors were attaching themselves to it simply out of curiosity, in the hope of finding material for their novels. Why, they thought, should they not find characters among the Members who could be portrayed in their stories? So it behoves us to realise that our language nowadays has become abstract, commonplace and vacuous and there is neither a sense of its holiness nor, as was once the case, a feeling of responsibility towards its use. That is why it is so extraordinarily difficult to put into modern words the great facts proclaimed by the Gospels. People cannot understand that our modern language is empty when compared, for example, with the fulness of meaning implicit in a word of the ancient Greek language. When we read the Bible to-day we are reading something that in comparison with the original wording has been sifted not once but two or three times, and it is not the best but the worst that has remained. It does, of course, seem natural to quote from modern versions of the Bible, but we go astray most disastrously of all when we quote the Gospel of St. Mark in its modern rendering.
You know that at the very beginning of the Gospel of St. Mark, in Weizsacker's supposedly excellent translation—although as might be guessed from the high reputation it enjoys to-day, it is anything but excellent!—these words are found:
“As it is written in the prophet Isaiah: Behold I send my messenger before you who shall prepare the way before you. Listen how the voice is heard in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.”
[The words in the English Authorised Version are: ‘As it is written in the Prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.’]
When we read a passage like this it would be self-deception to pretend that we understand it; if we are honest we shall admit that it is utterly incomprehensible to us. The passage is either of no significance or it says something we cannot understand. The first thing to do, then, is to assemble concepts enabling us to grasp the meaning of this saying of Isaiah. Isaiah was referring to the event which was to be of supreme significance for the evolution of humanity. What has already been said gives some indication of what Isaiah was foretelling in these words.
In ancient days man was endowed with a kind of clairvoyance and through the forces of his soul was able to rise into the divine-spiritual world. When this happened he was not using his Ego, his ‘I’, at the stage of development it had then reached; he was using his astral body which contained the powers of seership, whereas the forces rooted in the Ego were only gradually being awakened by perception of the physical world. The ‘I’ uses physical instruments, but in earlier times, if a man were seeking revelation, he used his astral body, seeing and perceiving through it. The process of evolution itself consisted in the transition from use of the astral body to use of the ‘I’. The Christ Impulse was to be the most powerful factor in the development of the ‘I’. If the words of St. Paul: ‘Not I but Christ in me’ are fulfilled in the ‘I’, then the ‘I’ is able to grow into the spiritual world through its own forces, whereas formerly this was possible only for the astral body.
This, then, is how evolution proceeded: Man once used his astral body as an organ of perception, but the astral body became less and less able to serve that purpose. When the time of Christ's coming was drawing near, it was losing its power to see into the spiritual world. Man could no longer be united with that world through his astral body and the ‘I’ was not yet strong enough to reveal it. That was the state of things when the time of Christ's coming was approaching.
In the course of human evolution the important steps which are eventually to take place have always to be prepared in advance. This was so in the case of the Christ Impulse too; but there was necessarily a period of transition. There could be no sudden change from the time when man felt his astral body becoming unreceptive to the spiritual world, becoming barren and desolate, to a time when the ‘I’ was kindled into activity through the Christ Impulse. What happened was that as the result of a certain influence from the spiritual world a few human beings were able to experience in the astral body something of what was later to be seen and known by the ‘I’. Egohood was prepared for, anticipated as it were in the astral body. It was through the ‘I’ and its development that man became Earth-Man in the real sense. The astral body properly belonged to the evolutionary period of the Old Moon, when the Angels were at the human stage. Man is at the human stage on the Earth. On the Old Moon it was appropriate for man to use his astral body. Everything else was merely preparation for the development of the ‘I’. The earliest stages of Earth-evolution proper were a recapitulation of the Old Moon-evolution, for man could never become fully man in the astral body; on the Old Moon it was only the Angels who could reach the human stage in the astral body. And just as the Christ lived in earthly man in order to inspire his ‘I’, so there were Angels who, having reached the human stage on the Old Moon, prophetically inspired man's astral body as a preparation for Egohood. A time was to come in human evolution on the Earth when man would be ready for the development of the ‘I’. On the Old Moon the Angels had developed to the highest stage, but as we have heard, only in the astral body. Now, in order that man might be prepared for Egohood, it was necessary that in exceptional conditions, and through grace, certain individuals should be inspired to work on the Earth as Angels; although they were men, the reality was that Angels were working in and through them.
This is a concept of great importance, without which there can be no understanding of human evolution in line with that of occultism. It is easy enough to say simply that everything is maya, but that is a mere abstraction. We must be able to say: Yes, a man is standing in front of me, but he is maya—indeed who knows if he is really a man? Perhaps what seems to be a human figure is only the outer sheath; perhaps some quite other being is using this sheath in order to accomplish a task that is beyond man's capacity.—I have given an indication of this in The Portal of Initiation.
Such an event in the history of humanity actually took place when the Individuality who had lived in Elijah was reborn as John the Baptist. An Angel entered into the soul of John the Baptist in that incarnation, using his bodily nature and also his soul to accomplish what no human being could have accomplished. In John the Baptist there lived an Angel whose mission was to herald in advance the Egohood that was to be present in its fulness in Jesus of Nazareth. It is of the greatest importance to realise that John the Baptist was maya and that an Angel, a Messenger, was living in him. This is indeed what the Greek says: Lo, I send my Messenger. The Messenger is an Angel. But nobody pays attention to what is actually said here. A deep mystery, enacted in the Baptist and foretold by Isaiah, is indicated. Isaiah foretold that the future John the Baptist would be maya—in reality he was to be the vehicle for the Angel, the Messenger who was to proclaim what man will become if he takes the Christ Impulse into himself. Angels announce in advance what man will later become. The passage in question might therefore be translated: Lo, the bestower of Egohood sends his Messenger (Angel) before you to whom Egohood is to be given.
Let us now see if we can discover the meaning of the third sentence. We must first try to picture the conditions prevailing in man's inner life when the astral body had gradually lost the power to send out its forces like feelers and to see clairvoyantly into the divine-spiritual world. Formerly, when the astral body was activated, man was able to look into that world, but this faculty was disappearing and darkness spreading within him. He had once been able to expand his astral body over all the beings of the spiritual world, but now he was inwardly desolate, inwardly isolated—the Greek word is ἔρημος. At that time the human soul lived in isolation, in desolation. This is what the Greek text tells us: Lo, a voice seems to speak in the desolation of the soul—call it ‘wilderness’ of the soul if you like—when the astral body can no longer expand into the divine-spiritual world. Hear the cry in the wilderness, in the desolation of the soul!
What is it that is being proclaimed in advance? First of all we must be clear about the meaning of the word Kyrios, when it was used in Hebrew but also still in Greek in reference to manifestations of the soul and spirit. To translate it simply as ‘the Lord’, with the usual connotation, is sheer nonsense. In ancient times everyone using the word Kyrios knew perfectly well that its meaning was connected with the development of man's soul-life and its mysteries. In the astral body, as we know, are the forces of thinking, feeling and willing; the soul thinks, feels and wills. These are the three forces working in the soul but they are actually its servants. In earlier times man was under their domination and he obeyed them, but as his evolution progressed these forces were to become the servants of the Kyrios, the Ruler, the Lord—in short, of the ‘I’. Used in relation to the soul, the word Kyrios actually meant the ‘I’. At this stage it would no longer be true to say: ‘The Divine-Spiritual thinks, feels and wills in me’, but rather: ‘I think, I feel, I will.’ The passage should be rendered more or less as follows.—Prepare yourselves, you human souls, to move along those paths that will awaken the Kyrios, the powerful ‘I’ within you; listen to the cry in the solitude of the soul. Make ready the path (or way) of the ‘I’, the Lord of the soul. Open the way for his forces so that he may no longer be the slave but the Ruler of thinking, feeling and willing. Lo, the power that is the ‘I’ sends his Angel before you, the Angel who is to give you the possibility of understanding the cry in the solitude of the astral soul. Prepare the paths of the ‘I’, open the way for the forces of the ‘I’.—Such is the meaning of these significant words of the prophet Isaiah; they point to the greatest of all events in the evolution of humanity. You will now understand the sense in which he speaks about the future John the Baptist, indicating how man's soul in its solitude longs for the coming of its Lord and Ruler, the ‘I’. Such is the real meaning of this passage and in this sense it is to be understood.
Why was John the Baptist able to be the bearer of the Angel? It was because he had received a particular form of Initiation. Initiations are not all identical in character and individuals who have a definite mission to fulfil must undergo a special form of Initiation. Now the writing of the stars in the heavens is so ordered as to reveal the nature and facts of happenings in the spiritual world. Thus a man may receive the Sun-Initiation, which means that he is initiated into the mysteries of the spiritual world of Ahura Mazdao—the spiritual world of which the Sun is the outer expression. But there are twelve forms of the Sun-Initiation, each of which differs from the other eleven. A man will receive a particular form of Initiation according to the mission he is to fulfil for humanity. His Initiation, though still a Sun-Initiation, may be of such a kind that the forces stream in as they do when the Sun is standing, for instance, in the constellation of Cancer; and these forces will be very different in the case of an Initiation connected with the Sun in Libra. These are the expressions used to indicate specialised Initiations. Individuals chosen for a mission as lofty as that of John the Baptist must receive Initiation in the form that can give the strength necessary for the fulfilment of their mission. And so in order that he might become the bearer of the Angel, John the Baptist received the Sun-Initiation originating from the constellation of Aquarius. The Sun in Aquarius is the symbol for the form of Initiation received by John the Baptist in order that he might become the bearer of the Angel. He received the Sun-forces which flow when the Sun is standing in Aquarius—the Waterman. The sign was the symbol indicating that John the Baptist had received this particular Initiation. In actual fact the name Aquarius, or Waterman, was given to the zodiacal sign because those who had received that Initiation acquired the faculty which enabled John the Baptist, for example, to achieve what he did. When men were plunged under water, their etheric bodies were momentarily loosened and in that condition it was possible for them to perceive what action was of the greatest importance at that particular time. Baptism in the Jordan revealed to those who underwent it the momentous significance of that period in history. It was to this end that John had received the baptismal Initiation and because this was connected with the rays of the Sun streaming from its position in a particular constellation, the constellation too was known symbolically as the Waterman. The name of the constellation was derived from the human faculty connected with it, and not vice versa.
Nowadays many learned ignoramuses try to explain spiritual happenings of this character by bringing Heaven down to Earth, saying that such things are simply indications of the movement of the Sun through the Zodiac. These learned gentlemen, who fundamentally know nothing, explain events in humanity by reference to the heavens. In the case of John the Baptist, actually the opposite was true: the zodiacal sign was used to express something that had occurred on Earth and was then transferred to the Heavens.
John the Baptist could therefore rightly say: ‘I baptise you with water.’ This was the same as saying to his intimate disciples, as he might well have done, that he had received the Aquarius Initiation. The movement of the Sun through the Zodiac as seen with physical eyes is in the direction from Leo to Virgo; the spiritual movement is from Aquarius to Pisces. Consequently John the Baptist was able to proclaim something that would work as the forces of the Sun in Pisces and not in Aquarius; also that the Being who was to come would give a higher kind of Baptism than he himself was able to give. The spiritual Sun progresses from Aquarius to Pisces and when this happens the Aquarius Baptism becomes a Baptism with spiritual water—Pisces, the Fishes. Hence the ancient symbol of fishes for the Being who was the bearer of the Christ. Just as John, through very special influences, had received the Aquarius Initiation, so all the mysteries enacted around and in Jesus of Nazareth belonged to a Pisces Initiation. The Sun had moved forward, spiritually, from one zodiacal constellation to another, indicating that Jesus of Nazareth had passed through a Pisces Initiation.
All this is hinted at in St. Mark's Gospel but such things have to be presented in pictures. Christ Jesus draws to Himself those who are seeking that of which Pisces is the symbol. Hence His first disciples are all of them fishermen. The indication of the Sun's progression into Pisces is clear when we read the words of John the Baptist: ‘I have baptised you with water, but He will baptise you with the Holy Spirit.’ And as Christ passes along the shore of the Sea of Galilee, that is to say, when the Sun has moved so far that its counterpart could be seen rising in Pisces, the fishermen known as Simon and Simon's brother, James and James's brother, are inspired to follow Him.
How can we understand all this? We shall not understand it unless we go more deeply into the linguistic expressions used in those times. Our modern way of expressing ourselves is slovenly and banal. Thus when a human being is standing in front of us, we say: Here is a man—similarly when there are two or three. But what is there in front of us is only maya; if we see a being with two legs and a human face the only way of expressing what we see in our modern language is to say: That is a man. But what does occultism take this ‘man’ to be? In the form in which he stands before us he is nothing but maya—approximately as real as a rainbow in the sky. A rainbow is a reality only as long as the necessary conditions of rain and sunshine are present; as soon as the relation between sunshine and rain changes, the rainbow vanishes. It is exactly the same in the case of a man. He is only a confluence of forces of the Macrocosm; we must look for forces in the heavens, in the Macrocosm. For the occultist, what we assume on Earth to be a man is simply nothingness. The truth is that forces are streaming from above downwards and from below upwards, and they intersect. And just as a particular combination of rain and sun produces a rainbow, so do forces streaming together from above and from below out of the Macrocosm create a phenomenon, an illusory image, which we take to be a man. But the man we see before us is really nothing but maya. Where we think we see a man there are intersecting cosmic forces. You must take this quite seriously. The man as he stands before us is merely a shadow of many forces. But the being who manifests in the man may well be at a different place altogether from the point where the man with his two legs is standing.
Now think of three human beings. One is a peasant in ancient Persia, working his plough in the Persian countryside. He looks like a man, but in reality he is a soul whose forces are sustained by some world from above or from below, and if we are to have real knowledge of him we must ascend to the realm of these forces. The second man is possibly some kind of official in ancient Persia. He too is formed from another world through intersecting forces and again, if we are to know him in the real sense, we must ascend to the realm of those forces. Finally, think of a third Persian, or one of whom we should have to say even more emphatically: he is a veritable illusion, a phantom. To discover the truth about him we should have to ascend to the Sun to find the forces sustaining this phantom figure. There above, among the mysteries of the Sun, we should find what we might call the Golden Star—Zarathustra. Rays are sent down and on the Earth there lives the being we call Zarathustra, though his essential being is not there at all.
The important thing is to realise that in ancient times men were well aware of the significance of names. Names were not given as they are to-day but according to what was really living in a human being, apart altogether from the outer appearance. An old man at the time of Christ would have understood very well what was meant if someone had pointed to John the Baptist, saying: There is the Angel of God! The outer appearance would have been disregarded as a secondary consideration and attention paid only to the inner reality.—And now suppose the same mode of expression had been used in connection with Christ Jesus. What would have been said of Him in times when such things were understood? Nobody would have so much as dreamed of giving the appellation Christ Jesus to the body of flesh moving about the land; the body was regarded merely as the sign that what was streaming down spiritually from the Sun had gathered together at this particular point. And when this body—the body of Jesus—moved from one place to another it was simply that the Sun-force was being made visible. This Sun-force was able of itself to move from place to place, independently of a physical body. Occasionally, Christ Jesus was said to be ‘in the house’, that is to say, in the flesh; but the Being in the flesh also moved about without a body. In the Gospel of St. John, above all, the Evangelist often writes exactly as if the Sun-force were present in a body of flesh when in reality the Christ is moving from place to place purely in the spirit.
That is why it is so important for the deeds of Christ Jesus always to be brought into relationship with the physical Sun—which is the outward expression for the spiritual world when gathered together at the point where the physical body is present. For example, when Christ Jesus performs an act of healing, it is the Sun-force that heals, but the Sun must be in the right position in the heavens. Thus: ‘At even, when the sun did set they brought unto Him all that were diseased ...’ and so on. It was important to indicate that this healing force can flow down only when the physical Sun has set and is working in a purely spiritual way. Again when Christ Jesus needs special power in order to do His works, He must draw it from the spiritual Sun, not from the physically visible Sun. ‘And in the morning, rising up a great while before day, He went out ...’ The path of the Sun and the power of the Sun are expressly indicated, furthermore that it is the Sun-force that is working, that Jesus is simply the external sign and that this path taken by the Sun-force could also become visible to the naked eye. Wherever St. Mark's Gospel speaks of the Christ, what is meant is the Sun-force which, in that epoch of Earth-evolution, worked with special strength upon the land called Palestine. Moreover the Sun-force, gathered into a focus, was moving from place to place, and the body of Jesus was the outward sign making the movement of the Sun-force visible to physical sight. The paths of Jesus in Palestine were the paths of the Sun-force that had come down to the Earth. If you trace the paths of Jesus to form a kind of chart you will have before you the indication of a cosmic happening—the Sun-force had penetrated into the land of Palestine. It is a macrocosmic process—that is the essential point. This is made especially evident by the writer of St. Mark's Gospel, who was well aware that a body which was the bearer of a principle such as the Christ-Principle must be entirely subservient to it. The Gospel therefore directs attention to the world so gloriously proclaimed by Zarathustra—the world which lies behind the material world and influences the life of man. Through Christ Jesus it was again made clear how the forces of this spiritual world work into the Earth. Hence in the body—the body of the Nathan Jesus as we have heard [See Lecture-Course on the Gospel of St. Luke, lectures IV–VII.]—which was influenced in a particular way by the Zarathustra-Individuality, it was inevitable that a kind of repetition should take place of happenings connected with Zarathustra.
We know some of the beautiful legends about Zarathustra. Almost immediately after his birth occurred the first miracle, that known as the ‘Zarathustra smile’. The second miracle was when Duransurun, the King ruling the district where Zarathustra was born, determined to murder the child about whom retrograde Magi had made certain statements. But when the King was on the point of stabbing the child his arm was paralysed. Finding that he could not use his dagger to do away with the child, he ordered him to be taken out into the wilderness and left among the wild beasts. This is the expression used to indicate that already in earliest childhood Zarathustra was destined to see what everyone is bound to see if his gaze has not been cleansed of impurities. Instead of the majestic Group-Souls and the higher spiritual Beings, he sees the emanations of his untamed fantasies. This is what is meant when we are told that Zarathustra was left in the wilderness among the wild beasts, but remained unharmed. This was the third miracle; the fourth was again connected with wild beasts. And always it was the good spirits of Ahura Mazdao who ministered to him.
These miracles are to some extent repeated in St. Mark's Gospel. ‘And immediately the Spirit driveth him into the wilderness’ (the word really means solitude). ‘And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him.’
It is made clear to us here that the body was being prepared to become a focus of macrocosmic processes. What had happened to Zarathustra had to be repeated in the encounter with the wild beasts. The body became the bearer of macrocosmic processes.
In its very first lines the Gospel of St. Mark presents us with a vista of majestic grandeur and my aim in this lecture has been to show you how this Gospel acquires new life and power if only the words are understood in their right sense—not in that of our commonplace modern speech but in the sense of ancient language, when whole worlds lay behind each word. Our modern language needs to be recast in many ways before it is possible to discover what the words of ancient languages contained. When we say that man lives on the Earth and develops his ‘I’, or that he was present on the Old Moon when it was the Angels who reached their human stage—all this must be borne in mind when we read: Behold, I send my Angel before men. These words cannot be understood without the preliminary knowledge communicated by Spiritual Science.
If people were really honest to-day they would admit that the words at the beginning of St. Mark's Gospel are unintelligible to them. But instead they adopt an arrogant attitude and maintain that Spiritual Science is so much fantasy and puts all kinds of complications into what would otherwise be quite simple. But the fact of the matter is that people to-day have no real knowledge; they no longer recognise the principle adopted, for instance, in ancient Persia, when the sacred records were re-written from epoch to epoch in order to be clothed in a new form suited to every period. In this way the divine Word was recast in the form of the Zend Avesta, then again recast, and what we have to-day is its latest form. The Persian scriptures were, in fact, re-written seven times. One of the tasks of Anthroposophy is to teach men how necessary it is that records in which sacred mysteries are clothed in words should be re-written from epoch to epoch. For if we want to preserve the sublime language of the ancient writings we should not attempt in our re-writing to adhere pedantically to the old words; we should rather try to translate them into words that are immediately intelligible in the present age. An attempt to do this was made in the summer in the lecture-course on Genesis, and you will have realised then how many of the words must be re-cast. The lecture today may have given you some idea of how the same principle applies to the Gospel of St. Mark.
Elfter Vortrag
Im Laufe der Jahre sind in den verschiedenen Zweigen bei den verschiedenen Kursen, jedenfalls auch vor einem großen Teile der anthroposophischen Freunde, die hier sitzen, Betrachtungen über das Johannes-Evangelium, das Lukas-Evangelium, das Matthäus-Evangelium angestellt worden, und wir haben versucht, bei diesen Betrachtungen über die drei Evangelien vor unser geistiges Auge treten zu lassen von drei verschiedenen Seiten aus, gleichsam auf drei verschiedene Arten, das große Ereignis von Palästina, das Mysterium von Golgatha. Und es sind diese Betrachtungen vielleicht doch geeignet gewesen, eine immer steigende Hochschätzung dieser einzigartigen Ereignisse in unserer Seele zu begründen. Wir haben ja auch schon darauf aufmerksam gemacht, wie der Grund, warum wir vier Evangelien haben, im wesentlichen doch darin zu suchen ist, daß die Evangelienschreiber als inspirierte Okkultisten darstellen wollten das große Ereignis, jeder sozusagen von einer Seite aus, wie man irgend etwas Äußerliches abbildet oder photographiert von einem Standpunkte aus. Und wenn man Aufnahmen eines Dinges macht von verschiedenen Seiten her, so kann man durch Kombinationen dessen, was die Aufnahmen ergeben können, gleichsam durch Zusammenschauen vor die Seele rücken, was eigentliche Wirklichkeit, Realität ist. Jeder der Evangelisten gibt uns eigentlich Anlaß, das große Ereignis von Palästina von einer ganz besonderen Seite her zu betrachten.
Von einer Seite her, die wir zugleich nennen können die Eröffnung der höchsten menschlichen, okkulten und sonstigen Ziele, und neben diesem höchsten Menschlichen auch berücksichtigend das höchste Weltenprinzip, von dieser Seite her gibt uns das Johannes-Evangelium einen Einblick in die großen Ereignisse von Palästina.
Das Lukas-Evangelium eröffnet uns einen Ausblick auf die Geheimnisse, welche die Persönlichkeit des Jesus von Nazareth, des salomonischen und des nathanischen Jesus, umschweben bis zu dem Moment, da die große Inspiration des Jesus von Nazareth durch den Christus eingetreten ist.
Das Matthäus-Evangelium hat für diejenigen, die den Zyklus entweder gehört haben, als er vorgetragen wurde, oder die ihn später lesen werden, zu zeigen, wie sozusagen aus dem Volkstum des alten Hebräertums heraus, aus den Volksgeheimnissen des hebräischen Volkes heraus, sich vorbereitet sozusagen das physische Leibesprinzip, in welches inkarniert werden sollte für drei Jahre das ChristusPrinzip.
In einer gewissen Beziehung ist nun eigentlich wiederum das Markus-Evangelium dasjenige, das uns in die höchsten Höhen geisteswissenschaftlicher christlicher Betrachtungsweise führen kann, und durch das Markus-Evangelium wird uns Gelegenheit geboten, in manches hineinzuschauen, was uns mitgeteilt werden soll gerade durch die Evangelien, was uns aber durch die anderen Evangelien nicht in solcher Weise nahegebracht wird, wie eben durch das Markus-Evangelium. Und einige Worte, weil gerade die Gelegenheit noch ist, in Anknüpfung an das Markus-Evangelium heute schon zu Ihnen zu sprechen, das habe ich mir für diesen Abend zur Aufgabe gesetzt.
Nun müssen wir allerdings, wenn wir darüber sprechen, uns klar werden, wie sehr es notwendig ist, in mancherlei hineinzublicken, in das hineinzublicken die oberflächliche Welt der Gegenwart keine rechte Neigung hat. Wenn man das Markus-Evangelium und alle seine Tiefen verstehen soll, dann muß man sich bekanntmachen mit der ganz andersartigen Ausdrucksweise des Menschen zu der Zeit, als der Christus Jesus noch auf Erden wandelte. Nehmen Sie es mir nicht übel, wenn ich versuche, durch eine deutliche Schattierung, ein deutliches Helldunkel, Ihnen das zu sagen, was ich Ihnen eigentlich mit diesem sagen will.
Wir drücken durch die Sprache das aus, was wir eben sagen wollen, und in den Worten der Sprache soll das in einer gewissen Weise veranschaulicht werden, was in unserer Seele lebt. In der Art, durch die Sprache auszudrücken, was in unserer Seele lebt, unterscheiden sich die verschiedenen Epochen der Menschheitsentwickelung gar sehr. Und wenn wir zurückgehen würden in die Epoche der althebräischen Entwickelung, zu jener wunderbaren Ausdrucksweise, die noch möglich war in der althebräischen Tempelsprache, da würden wir eine ganz andere Art finden, die Geheimnisse unserer Seele in Worte zu kleiden, als die Menschen heute auch nur ahnen. Wenn ein Wort angeschlagen wurde in der althebräischen Sprache - es wurden ja nur die Konsonanten geschrieben, die Vokale wurden dann ergänzt -, so tönte in dieses Wort hinein nicht nur das, was heute hineintönt, ein ziemlich abstrakter Begriff, sondern eine ganze Welt. Und gerade deshalb wurden die Vokale nicht eigentlich ausgeschrieben, weil derjenige, der das sprach, gerade in der Art und Weise der Vokalisierung sein Innerstes gab, während in den Konsonanten mehr die Schilderung, die Abmalung dessen, was draußen ist, lag. Man darf sagen, daß zum Beispiel ein alter Hebräer, wenn er ein B hinzeichnete - das, was unserem heutigen B entspricht -, immer so etwas fühlte wie eine Abmalung von äußeren Verhältnissen, von etwas, das eine warme, hüttenartige Umschließung bildet. Der Buchstabe B rief immer hervor das Bild von etwas, was hausartig ein Wesen umschließen kann. Man konnte das B nicht aussprechen, ohne daß das in der Seele lebte. Und wenn man ein A vokalisierte, so konnte man das nicht, ohne daß in dem A etwas lebte von Stärke, von Kraft, ja selbst von hinstrahlender Kraft. So lebte die Seele weiter; es schwebte der Seeleninhalt mit den Worten hinaus und schwebte weiter in den Raum und schwebte zu den anderen Seelen hin. Also es war eine viel lebendigere Sache, das Sprachliche. Es ging viel mehr auf die Geheimnisse des Daseins ein als unsere Sprache.
Das ist das Licht, das ich Ihnen hinmalen möchte. Und den Schatten möchte ich dagegenstellen: daß wir in unserer Zeit in dieser Beziehung in hohem Grade Philister geworden sind. Unsere Sprache drückt nur noch Abstrakta, Allgemeinheiten aus. Das fühlen die Menschen gar nicht mehr. Sie drückt wirklich im Grunde genommen nur mehr Philiströses aus. Wie sollte es auch anders sein in einer Zeit, wo die Menschen anfangen, die Sprache sogar schriftstellerisch zu handhaben, lange bevor sie einen geistigen Inhalt haben; in einer Zeit, wo so unendlich viel als Druckware in die breite Masse hineingeht, wo jeder glaubt, etwas schreiben zu müssen, wo alles zum Gegenstand des Schreibens genommen wird. Ich habe erleben müssen, daß sich bei der Gründung unserer Gesellschaft Schriftsteller aus Neugierde einfanden, die die Absicht gehabt haben, vielleicht nur einen Roman herausziehen zu können aus dieser Sache. Warum sollte es da nicht Gestalten geben, die man verzapfen kann in öffentlicher Schriftstellerei? Also wir müssen uns klar sein, daß wir im Gegensatz zu der Art und Weise, wie man über Sprache dachte als über etwas Heiliges, demgegenüber man die Verantwortung hat, daß der Gott daraus sprechen soll -, daß wir eine Sprache haben, die abstrakt, leer, philiströs geworden ist. Daher ist es so unendlich schwierig, jene großen, gewaltigen Tatsachen, die uns mitgeteilt werden und anklingen zum Beispiel in den Evangelien, in heutige Worte hineinzupressen. Warum sollte auch der heutige Mensch nicht glauben, daß man alles in unserer Sprache geben kann! Er kann nicht verstehen, daß unsere Sprache irgend etwas sagt, was leer ist gegenüber dem, was selbst noch die griechische Sprache mit einem Worte meinte. Und wenn wir heute die Bibel lesen, lesen wir etwas, was gegenüber dem ursprünglichen Inhalte einmal gesiebt, zweimal gesiebt, dreimal gesiebt ist, aber so gesiebt ist, daß nicht das Beste, sondern daß immer das Schlechteste bleibt. Daher ist es natürlich billig, sich in einer gewissen Weise auf die heutigen Worte der Bibel zu berufen. Aber am schlechtesten kommen wir weg, wenn wir uns beim Markus-Evangelium auf die Bibel berufen, wie sie uns heute vorliegt. Das dürfen wir auf keinen Fall.
Nun wissen Sie, daß das Markus-Evangelium bei den ersten Worten zur Grundlage die Worte hat, welche die als vorzüglich geltende Übersetzung von Weizsäcker, die aber - man könnte sich das schon denken, weil sie eben heute als so vorzüglich angesehen wird — gar nicht so vorzüglich ist, folgendermaßen gibt: «Wie geschrieben steht in dem Propheten Jesajas: Siehe, ich sende meinen Boten vor dir her, der soll dir den Weg bereiten. Hört, wie es ruft in der Wüste: bereitet den Weg des Herrn, macht eben seine Pfade.»
Ehrliche Menschen müßten im Grunde genommen, wenn das Markus-Evangelium in dieser Weizsäckerschen Übersetzung so beginnt, sich sagen: Ich verstehe von alledem kein Wort, denn der, der das verstehen will, muß sich etwas vormachen. Wer ehrlich zu Werke geht, kann gar nichts verstehen, wenn gesagt wird: «Siehe, ich sende meinen Boten vor dir her, der soll dir den Weg bereiten, hört, wie es ruft in der Wüste: bereitet den Weg des Herrn, macht eben seine Pfade.» Denn entweder ist eine Trivialität gesagt, oder aber es ist irgend etwas gesagt, was man nicht verstehen kann. Nun muß man allerdings erst die Begriffe zusammentragen, die es möglich machen, zu verstehen einen solchen Ausspruch, wie der des Jesajas hier ist. Denn Jesajas wies hin auf das große gewaltige Ereignis, das das bedeutsamste Ereignis der Menschheitsentwickelung sein sollte. Auf was wies er eigentlich hin? Nun, wir können aus dem, was wir schon beschrieben haben, sehr wohl auf das hindeuten, was Jesajas voraussagte; wir können hindeuten, indem wir sagen:
In uralten Zeiten hatte der Mensch eine Art Hellsehen. Er hatte eine Möglichkeit, hineinzuwachsen mit seinen Seelenkräften in die geistig-göttliche Welt. Was war denn eigentlich mit dem Menschen der Fall, wenn er also hineinwuchs in die göttlich-geistige Welt? Das war der Fall, wenn er hineinwuchs in die göttlich-geistige Welt, daß er aufhörte, sein «Ich» zu gebrauchen, soweit es dazumal schon entwickelt war; er gebrauchte seinen astralischen Leib, und in diesem waren die Kräfte, welche Seherkräfte, Schaukräfte waren, während alle die Kräfte, die im Ich sitzen, an der Wahrnehmung der physischen Welt zunächst allmählich erweckt wurden. Das Ich ist es, das sich der sinnlichen Werkzeuge bedient. Der alte Mensch gebrauchte aber, wenn er Aufklärung sich verschaffen wollte über die Welt, seinen astralischen Leib. Also im Astralleib sah, nahm wahr der alte Mensch. Und darin besteht die Fortentwickelung, daß Sie finden den Übergang vom Astralleib zum Gebrauch des Ich. Und in bezug auf dieses Ich sollte der Christus-Impuls der intensivste Impuls sein. Wenn aufgenommen werden sollte in das Ich der Christus so, daß das Wort des Paulus wahr ist: Nicht ich, sondern der Christus in mir, — dann hat das Ich die Kraft, hineinzuwachsen in die geistige Welt durch sich selber. Früher konnte dies nur der Astralleib.
So haben wir eine Entwickelung der Menschheit also vor uns, so, daß wir sagen können: Der Mensch gebrauchte als Erkenntnisorgan seinen Astralleib, und immer mehr und mehr verlor er im Astralleib die Möglichkeit, überhaupt ein Erkenntnisorgan darin zu entwickeln. Es gab, gerade eben je mehr man sich dem Christus-Ereignis näherte, die Entwickelungsstufe, daß der Mensch sich sagen mußte: Mein Astralleib hat immer weniger und weniger die Möglichkeit, in die geistige Welt hineinzuschauen. Es wurde nichts mehr mit seiner Verbindung mit der geistigen Welt, und das Ich war noch nicht kraftvoll genug, um seinerseits irgend etwas an Aufklärung aus der Welt zu bekommen. Das war das Zeitalter, wo Christus sozusagen herannahte.
Nun handelt es sich in der wirklichen Entwickelung der Menschheit darum, daß gewisse große Fortschritte nach und nach vorbereitet werden und dann eben eintreten. So war es auch beim Christus-Impuls. Es mußte aber einen Übergang geben. Es konnte die Sache nicht so verlaufen, daß der Mensch sah, wie sein Astralleib nach und nach stumpf für die geistige Welt wurde, so daß er vollständige Öde und Wüstheit in sich gefühlt hätte, bis das Ich entzündet wurde durch den Christus-Impuls. So durfte es doch nicht kommen. Sondern bei einigen geschah es so, daß sie durch einen besonderen Einfluß der geistigen Welt schon im Astralleib etwas Ähnliches sahen, wie man es später durch das Ich erkennen und sehen sollte. Es wurde im Astralleib sozusagen die Ichheit vorbereitet. Das war eine Vorausnahme der Ichheit im Astralleib. Der Mensch war ja erst durch das Ich und durch seine Entwickelung Erdenmensch geworden. Der Astralleib gehörte eigentlich dem alten Monde an. Dazumal war der Angelos, der Engelmensch, auf der Menschheitsstufe. Der Engel war auf dem alten Mond Mensch, auf der Erde ist der Mensch Mensch. Das wissen wir. Für den Menschen schickte es sich auf dem Monde, seinen Astralleib zu gebrauchen. Alles übrige war nur Vorbereitung für die IchEntwickelung. Der Anfang unserer Erdenentwickelung war ein Wiederholen der Mondenentwickelung. Denn im astralischen Leib konnte der Mensch überhaupt nie völlig Mensch werden, sondern es konnte nur der Engel auf dem Monde Mensch werden im astralischen Leib. Ebenso wie im Erdenmenschen, um das Ich zu inspirieren, der Christus lebte, mußte daher zur Vorbereitung dieser Ichheit die Möglichkeit sein, daß von den Engeln des Mondes, von den Mondmenschen also, den Angeloi, Propheten da waren, die den Astralleib des Menschen inspirierten, damit sich die Ichheit schon vorbereiten konnte. Es mußte also das eintreten, was etwa ein Prophet so hätte charakterisieren können: Es wird in der Menschheitsentwickelung ein Zeitpunkt kommen, da wird die Menschheit reif werden zur Ich-Entwickelung. Im Astralleib haben sich zum Höchsten erhoben bloß die Angeloi des Mondes. Damit aber der Mensch vorbereitet werden kann zu dieser Ichheit, müssen gewisse Menschen, die das durch Gnade in Ausnahmezuständen erfahren, so inspiriert werden auf der Erde, daß sie wie Engel wirken, trotzdem sie Menschen sind, daß sie Engel in Menschengestalt sind.
Da kommen wir zu einem wichtigen okkulten Begriff, ohne den Sie überhaupt nicht verstehen können die Entwickelung der Menschheit im Sinne des Okkultismus. Äußerlich gesagt, ist es natürlich leicht, wenn man einfach davon spricht, daß alles Maya ist. Aber das ist ein Abstraktum. Das muß man wirklich ernst nehmen. Daher muß man sagen können: Nun ja, da steht ein Mensch vor mir, der ist aber Maya — wer weiß, ist der überhaupt ein Mensch? Vielleicht ist das Menschsein nur die äußere Hülle, und es benützt ein ganz anderes Wesen, als der Mensch es ist, diese äußere Hülle, um gerade etwas zu bewirken, was durch den Menschen noch nicht bewirkt werden kann. — Ich habe etwas davon angedeutet in meiner «Pforte der Einweihung».
In der Vorzeit wurde ein solches Ereignis aktuell für die Menschheit, als die Individualität, die im alten Elias gelebt hatte, in Johannes dem Täufer wiedergeboren wurde, und als in die Seele des Johannes des Täufers für seine damalige Inkarnation ein Engel einfuhr und die Leiblichkeit und auch die Seelenhaftigkeit Johannes’ des Täufers benützte, um das zu bewirken, was kein Mensch hätte bewirken können. In Johannes lebt ein Angelos, der vorherzugehen und vorherzuverkündigen hat, was als wahre Ichheit im umfassendsten Sinne in Jesus von Nazareth leben sollte. Das ist außerordentlich wichtig zu wissen, daß Johannes der Täufer eine Maya ist und in ihm ein Angelos, ein Bote lebt. Im Griechischen steht auch: Siehe, ich sende meinen Boten, Angelos, Engel. - Daran denkt nur der Deutsche nicht mehr, daß im Griechischen an dieser Stelle Angelos steht: Siehe, ich sende meinen Engel vor ihm her. - Es ist also hingedeutet auf ein tiefes Weltermysterium, das mit dem Täufer vorgegangen ist, das Jesajas vorausgesagt hat. Er charakterisiert den Johannes den Täufer als eine Maya, als eine Illusion, ihn, der in Wahrheit umschließt den Engel, den Angelos, der als Engel zu verkündigen hat, was der Mensch eigentlich werden soll durch die Aufnahme des Christus-Impulses, weil Engel vorher verkündigen müssen, was der Mensch erst später werden soll. Zu sagen wäre also an dieser Stelle: Siehe, das, was der Welt die Ichheit gibt, sendet den Angelos vor dir, dem die Ichheit gegeben werden soll, her.
Jetzt gehen wir zu dem dritten Satz. Was bedeutet er? Da muß man sich einmal die ganze welthistorische Situation vergegenwärtigen. Wie war es denn geworden in der Menschenbrust, da der Astralleib allmählich die Fähigkeit verloren hatte, seine Kräfte wie Fangarme auszustrecken und hellscherisch in die göttlich-geistige Welt hineinzuschauen? Früher, wenn der Astralleib in Tätigkeit versetzt worden war, konnte er hineinschauen in die göttlich-geistige Welt. Jetzt verschwand allmählich immer mehr und mehr diese Möglichkeit, und dunkel wurde es im Menschen. Der Mensch konnte früher ausbreiten seinen Astralleib über all die Wesenheiten der göttlichgeistigen Welt. Jetzt war er in sich einsam — einsam ist gleich &onuog. In der Einsamkeit lebte jetzt das, was Menschenseele war. Das steht auch da noch im griechischen Text: Siehe, wie es sich ausnimmt, wie es da drinnen spricht in der Einsamkeit der Seele -— meinetwillen sagen Sie, in der Wüstheit der Seele -, als der Astralleib sich nicht mehr ausbreiten konnte zu der göttlich-geistigen Welt. Höre hin, wie es ruft in deiner Seelenwüste, in deiner Seeleneinsamkeit.
Was aber verkündet sich voraus? Da müssen wir uns jetzt klar werden, was ein ganz bestimmtes Wort bedeutete, wenn man es gebrauchte von Seelenerscheinungen, von geistigen Erscheinungen überhaupt, vor allen Dingen im Hebräischen, aber auch noch im Griechischen: das Wort Kyrios. Wenn man das übersetzt mit «der Herr», wie das gewöhnlich geschieht, so übersetzt man einen wahrhaftigen knüppeldicken Unsinn. Was ist damit gemeint? Jeder in alten Zeiten, der einen solchen Ausspruch in den Mund nahm, wußte, daß damit etwas gemeint ist, was mit dem Seelenfortschritt des Menschengeschlechtes zusammenhängt. Daher wußte er, daß das Wort Kyrios hindeutete auch auf Seelengeheimnisse. Wir haben in der Seele, wenn wir auf den Astralleib blicken, verschiedene Kräfte. Denken, Fühlen und Wollen nennen wir sie gewöhnlich. Die Seele denkt, fühlt, will. Das sind die drei Kräfte, die in der Seele wirken. Aber es sind die dienenden Kräfte der Seele. Indem der Mensch fortschritt in der Entwickelung, wurden diese Kräfte, die früher die Herren waren, denen der Mensch hingegeben war - denn der Mensch mußte warten, ob sein Denken, Fühlen, Wollen gerufen wurde -, diese einzelnen Seelenkräfte wurden unterstellt dem Kyrios, dem Herrn der Seelenkräfte, dem Ich. Und nichts anderes wurde verstanden unter dem Wort, wenn es auf die Seele bezüglich war, als das Ich, das nun nicht mehr im alten Sinne festhielt: das GöttlichGeistige denkt, fühlt, will in mir, sondern: ich denke, ich fühle, ich will - der Herr macht sich geltend in den Seelenkräften. Bereitet euch vor, ihr Menschenseelen, solche Seelenwege zu gehen, daß ihr in eurer Seele erwecken laßt das starke Ich, Kyrios, den Herrn in eurer Seele. Hört, wie es ruft in der Seeleneinsamkeit. Bereitet die Kraft oder die Richtung des Seelenherrn, des Ich. Macht offen seine Kräfte! - So muß man ungefähr übersetzen: macht offen, daß es hereinkommen kann, daß es nicht der Sklave von Denken, Fühlen und Wollen ist, macht offen seine Kräfte! Und wenn Sie übersetzen diese Worte: Siehe, das, was die Ichheit ist, sendet her vor dir seinen Engel, der soll dir die Möglichkeit geben, zu verstehen, wie es ruft in der Einsamkeit der astralischen Seele; bereitet die Richtungen des Ich, macht offen für es, für das Ich, die Kräfte! — so haben Sie einen Sinn in diesen bedeutsamen Worten des Propheten Jesajas; so haben Sie den Hinweis auf das größte Ereignis der Menschheitsentwickelung; so verstehen Sie daraus, wie Jesajas von Johannes dem Täufer spricht, wie er hinweist darauf, daß die Menschenseeleneinsamkeit sich sehnt nach der Herankunft des Herrn in der Seele, des Ich. Und jetzt werden erst die Worte zu Mark und Erz, und so müssen wir, solche Worte auffassen.
Und warum konnte Johannes der Täufer der Träger des Angelos sein? Er konnte es sein, weil er eine ganz bestimmte Initiation hatte. Die Initiationen spezialisieren sich nämlich. Diese Initiationen sind nicht etwas Allgemeines, sie spezialisieren sich. Bei denjenigen Individualitäten, die eine ganz besondere Aufgabe haben, muß eine Initiation eintreten nach einer ganz bestimmten Art. Nun ist für alles das, was überhaupt in der geistigen Welt vorgeht, vorgesorgt, so daß wirklich am Himmel sich in Sternenschrift das zeigt, was eigentlich geistige Tatsachen sind. Man kann die Sonnen-Initiation empfangen, das heißt in die Geheimnisse der geistigen Welt eintreten, die die Welt des Ahura Mazdao ist, für die die Sonne der äußere Ausdruck ist. Aber man kann auf zwölferlei Art eingeweiht werden in die SonnenGeheimnisse, und jede Initiation ist in gewisser Beziehung eine Sonnen-Initiation, aber sie ist doch verschieden ausgestaltet in bezug auf die anderen elf. Je nachdem der Mensch nun diese oder jene Aufgabe für die gesamte Menschheit hat, bekommt er eine Initiation, von der man sagen kann: Dies ist eine Sonnen-Initiation, aber eine solche, die man so ausdrücken muß, daß man sagt, die Kräfte fließen so hinein, als wenn die Sonne im Zeichen des Krebses steht. Das ist anders, als wenn man eine Sonnen-Initiation empfängt, die man ausdrücken muß, indem man sagt: Die Kräfte fließen so hinein, wie wenn die Sonne im Zeichen der Waage steht. Das sind die Ausdrücke für verschieden spezialisierte Initiationen. Und diejenigen Individualitäten eben, die eine so hohe Aufgabe, eine so hohe Mission haben wie die hier für Johannes den Täufer charakterisierte, müssen in ganz besonderer Weise in eine Spezial-Initiation eingeweiht sein, weil sie ja nur aus dieser heraus die starke Kraft haben können, um auch unter Umständen in ganz einseitiger Weise diese Mission in der Welt durchzuführen. Und da hatte denn Johannes der Täufer, damit er der Träger des Angelos werden konnte, diejenige Sonnen-Initiation, die man nennen kann die Initiation aus dem Zeichen des Wassermanns heraus. So wie die Sonne im Zeichen des Wassermanns steht, so ist das ein Symbolum für die Art der Initiation, die Johannes der Täufer bekommen hatte, um der Träger des Engels zu werden, indem er die Kraft der Sonne aufnahm, wie sie eben zufließt, wenn sie so steht zu den anderen Sternen, daß man es bezeichnet mit dem Ausdruck: Sie steht im Zeichen des Wassermanns. Das war das Symbolum. Johannes hatte die Wassermann-Initiation. Das Zeichen bekam sogar den Namen Wassermann, weil derjenige, der die Wassermann-Initiation hatte, als geistige Einweihung ganz besonders die Fähigkeit hatte, dasjenige mit dem Menschen vorzunehmen, was Johannes als der «Wassermann», als der Täufer vornahm: nämlich die Menschen wirklich dazu zu bringen, daß sie mit dem Untertauchen unter das Wasser ihren Ätherleib soweit frei bekamen, daß sie zu einer solchen Selbsterkenntnis kamen, die es möglich macht, einzusehen, was in der betreffenden Zeit das Wichtigste ist. Die Menschen wurden untergetaucht, und da wurde frei für einen Moment der Ätherleib. Durch die Jordantaufe konnte der Mensch die ganz besondere Wichtigkeit dieser welthistorischen Epoche empfinden. Deshalb war Johannes eingeweiht in eben die Tauf-Initiation. Und weil man das symbolisch ausdrücken muß mit dem Herfließen der Sonnenstrahlen aus dem Zeichen, in dem die Sonne steht, so nannte man dieses Zeichen auch den Wassermann. So ist die Benennung von der menschlichen Fähigkeit hinauf übertragen. Heute machen eine ganze Anzahl gelehrter Nichtswisser den Versuch, sagen wir, die geistigen Ereignisse zu deuten, indem sie sozusagen den Himmel auf die Erde heruntertragen. Sie sagen: Nun, das bedeutet das Vorrücken der Sonne. — Alle gelehrten Herren, die im Grunde genommen nichts wissen, die deuten aus dem Himmel herein die Menschheitsereignisse. Umgekehrt war es: Was geistig im Menschen lebt, wurde auf den Himmel übertragen, indem man den Himmel als Ausdrucksmittel benutzte. So daß Johannes der Täufer sagen konnte: Ich bin der, der euch mit Wasser tauft. - Und das war dasselbe, wie wenn er gesagt hätte: Ich taufe euch mit Wasser, ich bin versehen mit der Initiation des Wassermanns. — Das wäre das Wort gewesen, das Johannes der Täufer hätte zu seinen intimen Schülern sagen können. Und so wie die Sonne entgegengesetzt vorrückt zu ihrem sinnlichen Gang, wenn Sie entgegengesetzt vom Wassermann gehen, so steht gegenüber die Jungfrau, dann geht es zur Waage. Wenn wir die Initiation aber nehmen, so müssen wir einen entgegengesetzten Gang auf der anderen Seite nehmen: von dem Wassermann zu den Fischen. So konnte Johannes sagen: Es wird etwas kommen, das nicht mehr so wird wirken müssen, wie es entspricht dem Wirken der Sonne aus dem Wassermann heraus, sondern wie es entspricht dem Wirken der Sonne aus den Fischen heraus. Es wird einer kommen, der wird eine höhere Taufe bringen. Wenn die geistige Sonne höhersteigt, so wird aus der Wassermann-Taufe die Taufe aus dem geistigen Wasser heraus. Die Sonne steigt vom Wassermann im Geistigen zu den Fischen herauf. Daher das bekannte Fischzeichen für den Träger des Christus, das ein altes Symbolum ist. Denn ebenso wie in Johannes durch ganz besondere geistige Einflüsse eine Wassermann-Initiation war, so war die Initiation, von der ich Ihnen da und dort schon gesprochen habe, die auf geheimnisvolle Weise durch alle Mysterien zustande kam, die sich um den Jesus abgespielt haben, eine FischInitiation. Ein Vorrücken der Sonne um ein Sternbild - das war das, was den Jesus von Nazareth hineinstellt in seine Zeit: daß er einer Fisch-Initiation zunächst unterworfen war.
Und im Evangelium des Markus wird uns das ja, man möchte sagen, genügend angedeutet; nur können solche Dinge nur bildhaft angedeutet werden. Der Christus Jesus zieht alle diejenigen an, die nach dem Fisch suchen. Daher sind seine ersten Apostel alle Fischer. Und wir können das, was ich gesagt habe, das Vorrücken zu den Fischen, handgreiflich finden, wenn uns gesagt wird: Ich habe euch mit Wasser getauft, Er wird euch mit Heiligem Geiste taufen.
Und da er am galiläischen See hinzog — das heißt, da die Sonne so weit gekommen war, daß man ihr Gegenbild hat kommen sehen von den Fischen herauf -, da finden sich inspiriert diejenigen, die genannt werden Simon und Simons Bruder, Jakobus und Jakobus’ Bruder Fischer, sie finden sich in der entsprechenden Weise inspiriert. Und wie können wir das alles verstehen? Wir können das nicht verstehen, wenn wir nicht noch ein wenig genauer auf die Ausdrucksweise der damaligen Zeit eingehen.
Philiströs ist unsere heutige Ausdrucksweise. Wenn ein Mensch vor uns steht, so sagen wir, das ist ein Mensch. Wenn ein zweiter vor uns steht, so sagen wir wieder, das ist ein Mensch. Ein dritter — wieder einer, und so weiter. Aber wir haben da bloß die Maya vor uns. Wenn ein Wesen zwei Beine und ein menschliches Antlitz hat, so haben wir in unserer philiströsen Ausdrucksweise nur das eine Wort: Das ist ein Mensch. Aber was ist für den Okkultismus ein Mensch? Nichts als Maya, nichts zunächst, wie er da vor uns steht, ist der Mensch, wirklich nichts. Er ist ungefähr ebensoviel wie der Regenbogen, der am Himmel steht. Wie lange ist der Regenbogen etwas? Nur so lange, als die betreffenden Bedingungen zwischen Regen und Sonnenschein gegeben sind. Wenn die Sonne und der Regen ihr Verhältnis ändern, so ist er weg. Genauso ist es mit dem Menschen. Der ist nur ein Zusammenströmen von Kräften des Makrokosmos. Kräfte müssen wir suchen am Himmel, da oder dort im Makrokosmos. Da wo man vielleicht einen Menschen vermutet irgendwo auf der Erde, da ist nichts für den Okkultisten. Aber Kräfte strömen da oben herunter und da unten hinauf, und da schneiden sie sich. Und wie die eigentümliche Konstellation bei Regen und Sonnenschein den Regenbogen ergibt, so geben Kräfte, die von oben und unten aus dem Makrokosmos zusammenströmen, eine Erscheinung, und die sieht so aus wie der Mensch - das ist der Mensch. Nichts ist der Mensch so, wie er vor uns dasteht. In Wahrheit ist er ein Schemen, eine Maya, ein Scheinbild. Denn wirklich sind die kosmischen Kräfte, die sich da schneiden, wo unser Auge einen Menschen zu sehen glaubt. Versuchen Sie ernst zu nehmen den Ausdruck: Der Mensch ist nichts, so wie er vor uns steht. Er ist Schatten von vielen Kräften. Die Wesenheit aber, die sich offenbart im Menschen, die kann ganz woanders sein als an dem Punkt, wo gerade der Mensch mit seinen zwei Beinen herumgeht. Da sind drei Menschen: Der eine ist ein urpersischer Arbeiter, der mit dem Pflug in der altpersischen Landwirtschaft wirkt. Er sieht aus wie ein Mensch. In Wahrheit ist er eine der Seelen, die gespeist werden in ihren Kräften aus dieser oder jener Welt von unten oder oben. Der zweite ist vielleicht ein urpersischer Beamter. Er wird von einer anderen Welt aus durch Kräfte gebildet, die sich in ihm schneiden. Wollen wir ihn kennen, so müssen wir zu diesen Kräften aufsteigen. Sie alle, wie Sie hier sitzen, sind in Ihrer Wirklichkeit ganz woanders. Hier herein strahlen nur die Kräfte von Ihrer eigentlichen Wesenheit. Dann stand ein dritter Perser da, von dem mußte man sagen: Der ist erst recht ein rechtes Trugbild, der ist erst recht ein Schemen, das dasteht. Was war das in Wahrheit? Da muß man bis auf die Sonne hinauf gehen; da sind die Kräfte, die dieses Schemen speisten. Da oben findet man unter den Sonnen-Geheimnissen dasjenige, was man nennen kann Goldstern, Zarathustra. Das sendet die Strahlen herunter, und hier unten steht ein Schemen, das man Zarathustra nennt. In Wahrheit ist sein Wesen gar nicht da. Das ist der dritte.
Nun ist das Wichtige, daß man in alten Zeiten sich bewußt war, was mit solchen Bezeichnungen gemeint ist; daß man nicht Namen gab wie heute, sondern daß man die Menschen benannte nach dem, was in ihnen lebte, nicht nach ihrem äußeren Scheinbilde. Darüber müssen wir uns schon ganz klar sein. So daß man hätte sagen können: Es hätte ein alter Mensch zur Zeit Christi es sehr wohl verstanden, wenn man hingewiesen hätte auf Johannes den Täufer und gesagt hätte: hier ist der Angelos des Gottes. Man hätte nur Rücksicht genommen auf das, was da Platz genommen hatte; man sprach von der Hauptsache, nicht von der Nebensache. Und nehmen wir nun einmal an, dieselbe Ausdrucksweise wurde angewendet auf Christus Jesus selber. Wie mußte man da, als man solche Sachen verstand, von dem Christus Jesus sprechen? Ja, was da auf der Erde wandelte, diesen Leib im Fleische den Christus Jesus zu nennen, das wäre einem Menschen der damaligen Zeit nicht im Traume eingefallen; sondern das war das Zeichen, daß dasjenige, was aus der Sonne geistig herunterströmte, in diesem Punkte in ganz besonderer Weise aufgefangen wurde. Ging dieser Leib, der der Leib des Jesus war, von einem Ort zum anderen, so war das die Sichtbarmachung der Sonnenkraft, die von einem Ort zum anderen ging. Diese Sonnenkraft konnte auch allein gehen. Zuweilen wurde der Ausdruck so gebraucht, daß der Christus Jesus «im Heim», im Fleisch war, aber was in ihm war, bewegte sich auch ohne seinen Leib weiter. Namentlich im JohannesEvangelium ist der Ausdruck so gebraucht, daß unter Umständen, wenn dieselbe Wesenheit sich rein geistig bewegt, der Evangelienschreiber ganz genau so spricht, wie wenn diese Sonnenkraft im fleischlichen Leibe wohnt.
Daher ist es so wichtig, daß die Taten des Christus Jesus immer in Beziehung gebracht werden zur physischen Sonne, die der äußere Ausdruck ist für die geistige Welt, die aufgefangen wird an dem Punkte, wo der fleischliche Leib herumwandelt. Wenn also der Christus Jesus zum Beispiel heilt, dann ist es die Sonnenkraft, die da heilt. Die muß aber an dem richtigen Orte des Himmels stehen: «Da es aber Abend geworden war, als die Sonne unterging, brachten sie zu ihm alle, die ein Leid hatten», Krankheiten und so weiter. — Es ist wichtig, daß man andeutet, daß diese Heilkraft herunterfließen kann, wenn die äußere Sonne untergegangen ist, wenn die Sonne nur noch geistig wirkt. Und als er wieder eine bestimmte Kraft braucht, um zu wirken, da mußte er diese auch noch aus der geistigen Sonne nehmen, nicht aus der physischen sichtbaren Sonne. «Und früh morgens, noch im Dunkeln stand er auf und ging hinaus.» — Der Weg der Sonne und der Sonnenkraft wird uns ausdrücklich angedeutet: daß diese Sonnenkraft wirkt, und daß im Grunde genommen der Jesus nur das äußere Zeichen ist, daß dieser Weg der Sonnenkraft auch dem bloßen äußeren Auge sichtbar werden konnte. Und überall, wo wir im MarkusEvangelium die Rede haben von dem Christus, ist gemeint die Sonnenkraft, die für jene Epoche unserer Erdenentwickelung ganz besonders wirksam geworden ist auf diesem Fleck der Erde, der da Palästina heißt. Und man konnte die Sonnenkraft sehen: In der oder jener Zeit ging der Christus von dem Ort zu dem Ort. Man könnte ebensogut sagen: In dieser Zeit bewegte sich die geistige Kraft der Sonne, wie in einem Brennpunkte gesammelt, von dem Ort zu jenem Ort. Und der Leib des Jesus war das äußere Zeichen, das den Augen sichtbar machte, wie sich die Sonnenkraft bewegte. Die Wege des Jesus in Palästina waren die Wege der auf die Erde herabgekommenen Sonnenkraft. Und zeichnen Sie die Schritte des Jesus als eine besondere Landkarte auf, dann haben Sie ein kosmisches Ereignis: das Hereinwirken der Sonnenkraft aus dem Makrokosmos in das Land Palästina. Und auf diese makrokosmische Sache kommt es an. Darauf deutet insbesondere der Schreiber des Markus-Evangeliums hin, der das wohl kannte, daß ein Leib, der der Träger eines solchen Prinzipes war, wie es das Christus-Prinzip ist, in einer ganz besonderen Weise von seinem Prinzip mußte überwunden werden. Es war also das Hinausweisen gerade in jene Welt, die Zarathustra so großartig hinter der sinnlichen Welt angekündigt hat, das Hinausweisen auf diese Welt, wie sie wieder hereinwirkt auf die Menschenwelt. So war jetzt durch Christus Jesus angedeutet, wie die Kräfte wieder hereinwirken auf die Erde. Daher mußte in dem Leib, der ja, wie wir gesehen haben, in einer gewissen Weise -— wenn er auch jetzt schon der Leib des nathanischen Jesus war - doch beeinflußt war von der Zarathustra-Individualität, auch eine Art Wiederholung der Zarathustra-Vorgänge vor sich gehen.
Nun hören wir die große schöne Legende von Zarathustra. Als ihn seine Mutter geboren hatte, da zeigte Zarathustra als erstes Wunder das berühmte Zarathustra-Lächeln. Das zweite der Wunder war das, daß der damalige König jenes Distriktes, wo Zarathustra geboren worden war, Duransarun, den Beschluß faßte, zu ermorden den Zarathustra, von dem ihm die rückschrittlichen Magier besondere Dinge gesagt hatten, daß aber dem König, als er erschien, das Kind zu erdolchen, der Arm gelähmt wurde. Das war das zweite der Wunder nach der Geburt des Zarathustra. Und da ließ dieser König, der seinen Dolch nicht gebrauchen konnte gegenüber Zarathustra, das Kind hinausführen zu den wilden Tieren der Wüste. Das ist der Ausdruck dafür, daß jetzt schon in frühester Kindheit Zarathustra sehen mußte dasjenige, was der Mensch sehen muß, wenn er unrein hinaussieht. Er sieht statt der edlen Gruppenseele und der edlen, höheren geistigen Wesenheiten den Ausfluß seiner wilden Phantasie. Das ist das Hinausführen in die Wüste zu den wilden Tieren, von denen Zarathustra unversehrt bleibt. Das ist das dritte der Wunder. Das vierte war wieder ein Wunder bei den wilden Tieren und so weiter. Immer waren es die guten Geister des Ahura Mazdao, die dem Zarathustra dienten.
Jene Wunder finden wir im Markus-Evangelium wiederholt: «Und alsbald treibt ihn der Geist in die Wüste» — eigentlich heißt es Einsamkeit — «vierzig Tage lang, und wurde versucht vom Satan, und war bei den wilden Tieren, und die Engel dienten ihm.» Da wird uns gezeigt, daß der Leib vorbereitet wurde, sozusagen wie in einem Brennpunkte dasjenige aufzunehmen, was im Makrokosmos vorging. Es mußte das wieder geschehen, was bei Zarathustra geschehen war: das Hinausführen zu den wilden Tieren. Der Leib nahm auf, was aus dem Makrokosmos hereinkam.
Das Markus-Evangelium stellt uns schon in den allerersten Zeilen in die größten Zusammenhänge hinein. Und ich wollte Ihnen zeigen, wie im Grunde genommen dieses Markus-Evangelium, wenn man nur erst die Worte im rechten Sinne versteht — nicht wie in dem der heutigen philiströsen Sprache, sondern in dem der alten Sprachen, wo jedes Wort hinter sich lebendige Welten hat -, wenn man es im Sinne dieser alten Sprachen versteht, dann bekommt das Markus-Evangelium neues Leben, neue Kraft. Aber man muß sagen: Unsere heutige Sprache kann erst mit vielen Umschreibungen das wiederum herausfinden, was für die alten Sprachen schon in den Worten gelegen hat. Das, was wir sprechen, wenn wir sagen: Der Mensch lebt auf der Erde und bildet sein Ich aus; der Mensch lebte früher auf dem Monde, da waren es die Engel, die ihre Menschheitsstufe durchmachten -, das liegt alles zugrunde, wenn es heißt: «Siehe, ich sende meinen Engel vor den Menschen her.» Diese Worte sind nicht zu verstehen ohne die Voraussetzung dessen, was in der Geisteswissenschaft geboten wird. Und die Leute in der Gegenwart sollten ehrlich sein und sollten sagen bei den Worten am Beginne des Markus-Evangeliums: Das ist unverständlich. — Statt dessen stehen sie im billigen Hochmut da und erklären, die Geisteswissenschaft sei eine Phantasterei, die allerlei hineinlegt in das, was sie in einfacher Weise wissen. Sie wissen es eben gar nicht, die Menschen der Gegenwart. Und man hat heute nicht mehr das Prinzip, das man zum Beispiel im alten Persien hatte, wo von Epoche zu Epoche die alte heilige Urkunde umgeschrieben wurde, um für jede Epoche neu eingekleidet zu werden. So wurde das göttlich-geistige Wort als Zend Avesta umgestaltet und wieder umgestaltet. Und was heute da ist, ist die letzte Gestalt. Siebenmal wurde die persische Bibel neu geschrieben. Und die Anthroposophie soll den Menschen lehren, wie notwendig es ist, daß die Bücher, in denen die heiligen Geheimnisse geschrieben werden, von Epoche zu Epoche umgeschrieben werden müssen. Denn gerade wenn man den großen alten Stil bewahren will, dann darf man nicht versuchen, sozusagen soviel als möglich bei den alten Worten zu verbleiben. Das kann man nicht, die versteht man nicht mehr, sondern man muß versuchen, in unmittelbares Verständnis der Gegenwart die alten Worte umzusetzen. Wir haben das versucht in bezug auf die Genesis im Sommer. Da haben Sie gesehen, wie manche der Worte umgesetzt werden müssen. Sie haben vielleicht heute einen kleinen Begriff davon bekommen, wie auch im Markus-Evangelium die Worte umgesetzt werden müssen.
Eleventh Lecture
Over the years, in various branches and in various courses, and certainly also before a large number of the anthroposophical friends sitting here, reflections have been made on the Gospel of John, the Gospel of Luke, and the Gospel of Matthew, and in these reflections on the three Gospels we have tried to let the great event in Palestine, the mystery of Golgotha, appear before our spiritual eye from three different sides, in three different ways, as it were, the great event in Palestine, the mystery of Golgotha. And these reflections may well have been suitable for establishing an ever-increasing appreciation of these unique events in our souls. We have already pointed out that the reason why we have four Gospels is essentially to be found in the fact that the Gospel writers, as inspired occultists, wanted to depict the great event, each from one side, so to speak, as one depicts or photographs something external from a certain point of view. And when one takes pictures of something from different sides, one can, by combining what the pictures reveal, bring what is actually real, reality, before the soul, as it were, by looking at them together. Each of the evangelists actually gives us occasion to view the great event in Palestine from a very special side.
From one side, which we can also call the opening of the highest human, occult, and other goals, and besides this highest human aspect also taking into account the highest world principle, from this side the Gospel of John gives us an insight into the great events of Palestine.
The Gospel of Luke opens up a view of the mysteries surrounding the personality of Jesus of Nazareth, the Solomonic and Nathanic Jesus, up to the moment when the great inspiration of Jesus of Nazareth entered through the Christ.
For those who have either heard the cycle as it was presented or who will read it later, the Gospel of Matthew shows how, as it were, out of the folklore of the ancient Hebrews, out of the folk secrets of the Hebrew people, the physical body principle was prepared, so to speak, in which the Christ principle was to be incarnated for three years.
In a certain sense, it is actually the Gospel of Mark that can lead us to the highest heights of spiritual scientific Christian contemplation, and through the Gospel of Mark we are given the opportunity to look into many things that are to be communicated to us through the Gospels, but which are not brought home to us in the same way through the other Gospels as they are through the Gospel of Mark. And I have set myself the task for this evening of saying a few words, since the opportunity is still there, in connection with the Gospel of Mark.
Now, however, when we speak about this, we must realize how necessary it is to look into many things that the superficial world of the present has no real inclination to look into. If one is to understand the Gospel of Mark and all its depths, one must familiarize oneself with the very different way of expressing oneself that people had at the time when Christ Jesus still walked on earth. Do not take it amiss if I try to tell you what I actually want to say with this by means of a clear shading, a clear chiaroscuro.
We express what we want to say through language, and the words of language are supposed to illustrate in a certain way what lives in our souls. The way in which we express what lives in our souls through language differs greatly between the different epochs of human development. And if we were to go back to the epoch of ancient Hebrew development, to that wonderful mode of expression that was still possible in the ancient Hebrew temple language, we would find a completely different way of clothing the secrets of our soul in words than people today can even imagine. When a word was spoken in the ancient Hebrew language—only the consonants were written, the vowels were added later—it sounded not only like what it sounds like today, a rather abstract concept, but like a whole world. And that is precisely why the vowels were not actually written out, because the person speaking revealed his innermost feelings in the way he vocalized, while the consonants were more a description, a depiction of what was outside. One could say that when an ancient Hebrew wrote a B – which corresponds to our B today – he always felt something like a depiction of external circumstances, of something that forms a warm, hut-like enclosure. The letter B always evoked the image of something that can enclose a being like a house. You couldn't pronounce the letter B without it living in your soul. And when you vocalized an A, you couldn't do so without something living in the A, something strong, powerful, even radiant. In this way, the soul lived on; the content of the soul floated out with the words and continued to float in space and float toward other souls. So language was a much more living thing. It went much more into the mysteries of existence than our language does.
That is the light I would like to paint for you. And I would like to contrast that with the shadow: that in our time we have become highly philistine in this respect. Our language now expresses only abstractions, generalities. People don't feel that anymore. Basically, it only expresses philistinism. How could it be otherwise in a time when people are beginning to use language even in writing long before they have any intellectual content; in a time when so much goes into print and reaches the masses, when everyone thinks they have to write something, when everything becomes the subject of writing. When our society was founded, I experienced writers coming together out of curiosity, with the intention of perhaps being able to get a novel out of it. Why shouldn't there be characters that can be used in public writing? So we must be clear that, in contrast to the way language was once thought of as something sacred, something for which we are responsible because God speaks through it, we now have a language that has become abstract, empty, philistine. That is why it is so infinitely difficult to squeeze those great, powerful facts that are communicated to us and resonate, for example, in the Gospels, into today's words. Why shouldn't people today believe that everything can be expressed in our language? They cannot understand that our language says anything that is empty compared to what even the Greek language meant with a single word. And when we read the Bible today, we read something that has been sifted once, twice, three times in relation to its original content, but sifted in such a way that it is not the best that remains, but always the worst. Therefore, it is of course easy to refer to the words of the Bible as they are today. But we are at our worst when we refer to the Gospel of Mark as it is available to us today. We must not do that under any circumstances.
Now you know that the Gospel of Mark begins with words that are based on what is considered to be Weizsäcker's excellent translation, but which — as one might expect, since it is regarded as so excellent today — is not so excellent after all: “As it is written in the prophet Isaiah: Behold, I send my messenger before you, who will prepare your way. Hear, how it cries in the desert: prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.”
Honest people would basically have to say to themselves, if the Gospel of Mark begins in this Weizsäcker translation: I don't understand a word of this, because anyone who wants to understand it must be deceiving themselves. Anyone who approaches this honestly cannot understand anything when it says: “Behold, I send my messenger before you, who shall prepare your way. Hear what is spoken in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.” For either a triviality is being said, or something is being said that cannot be understood. Now, of course, one must first gather together the concepts that make it possible to understand a statement such as Isaiah's here. For Isaiah was pointing to the great and mighty event that was to be the most significant event in the development of humanity. What was he actually pointing to? Well, from what we have already described, we can very well point to what Isaiah foretold; we can point to it by saying:
In ancient times, human beings had a kind of clairvoyance. They had the ability to grow into the spiritual-divine world with their soul forces. What actually happened to human beings when they grew into the divine-spiritual world? When they grew into the divine-spiritual world, they ceased to use their “I” to the extent that it had already developed at that time; they used their astral body, and in this were the powers that were seer's powers, powers of vision, while all the powers that reside in the I were gradually awakened to the perception of the physical world. It is the I that makes use of the sensory instruments. But when the old human being wanted to gain knowledge about the world, he used his astral body. So the old human being saw and perceived in the astral body. And therein lies the further development, that you find the transition from the astral body to the use of the I. And in relation to this I, the Christ impulse should be the most intense impulse. If Christ is to be taken into the I in such a way that Paul's words are true: Not I, but Christ in me — then the I has the power to grow into the spiritual world through itself. Formerly, only the astral body could do this.
Thus we have before us an evolution of humanity such that we can say: Human beings used their astral body as an organ of knowledge, and more and more they lost the ability to develop any organ of knowledge in the astral body. The closer one came to the Christ event, the more one reached a stage of development where one had to say: My astral body has less and less ability to see into the spiritual world. Nothing remained of his connection with the spiritual world, and the I was not yet powerful enough to obtain any enlightenment from the world. That was the age when Christ was approaching, so to speak.
Now, in the actual development of humanity, certain great advances are gradually prepared and then actually occur. This was also the case with the Christ impulse. But there had to be a transition. It could not be that human beings saw their astral body gradually becoming dull to the spiritual world, so that they felt complete desolation and emptiness within themselves until the I was ignited by the Christ impulse. That could not be allowed to happen. Instead, some people, through a special influence from the spiritual world, saw something in their astral body that was similar to what they would later recognize and see through the I. The I-ness was prepared in the astral body, so to speak. This was a preliminary assumption of the I-ness in the astral body. After all, human beings had only become earthly human beings through the I and through their development. The astral body actually belonged to the old moon. At that time, Angelos, the angelic human being, was on the human stage. The angel was human on the old moon; on Earth, the human being is human. We know that. It was appropriate for human beings to use their astral bodies on the moon. Everything else was merely preparation for the development of the I. The beginning of our earthly development was a repetition of the lunar development. For in the astral body, human beings could never become completely human; only the angel could become human in the astral body on the moon. Just as in earthly human beings, in order to inspire the I that was Christ, there had to be the possibility, in preparation for this I-ness, that the angels of the moon, the moon people, the Angeloi, prophets, were present to inspire the astral body of human beings so that the I-ness could already be prepared. What a prophet might have characterized as follows had to happen: There will come a time in human evolution when humanity will be ready for ego development. In the astral body, only the Angeloi of the moon have risen to the highest level. But in order for human beings to be prepared for this ego, certain people who experience this through grace in exceptional circumstances must be inspired on earth in such a way that they act like angels, even though they are human beings, that they are angels in human form.
This brings us to an important occult concept without which you cannot understand the development of humanity in the occult sense at all. Outwardly speaking, it is of course easy to simply say that everything is Maya. But that is an abstraction. You have to take it really seriously. Therefore, you have to be able to say: Well, there is a human being standing in front of me, but he is Maya — who knows if he is even a human being? Perhaps being human is only the outer shell, and a completely different being than the human being uses this outer shell to bring about something that cannot yet be brought about by the human being. I hinted at this in my book The Gate of Initiation.
In ancient times, such an event became relevant for humanity when the individuality that had lived in the old Elijah was reborn in John the Baptist, and when an angel entered the soul of John the Baptist for his incarnation at that time and used the physicality and also the soul nature of John the Baptist to bring about what no human being could have brought about. In John lives an Angelos who has to go before and proclaim what was to live as true selfhood in the most comprehensive sense in Jesus of Nazareth. It is extremely important to know that John the Baptist is a Maya and that an Angelos, a messenger, lives in him. In Greek it also says: Behold, I send my messenger, Angelos, angel. Only Germans no longer think of the fact that in Greek the word Angelos is used here: Behold, I send my angel before him. This therefore points to a profound world mystery that preceded the Baptist, which Isaiah predicted. It characterizes John the Baptist as a Maya, as an illusion, he who in truth encloses the angel, the Angelos, who as an angel has to proclaim what man is actually to become through the reception of the Christ impulse, because angels must first proclaim what man is to become later. So at this point it would be appropriate to say: Behold, that which gives the world its individuality sends the Angelos before you, to whom individuality is to be given.
Now let us turn to the third sentence. What does it mean? Here we must first consider the entire situation of world history. What had happened in the human breast when the astral body gradually lost its ability to extend its forces like tentacles and look clearly into the divine-spiritual world? In the past, when the astral body was activated, it could look into the divine-spiritual world. Now this possibility gradually disappeared more and more, and darkness fell within human beings. In earlier times, human beings could spread their astral body over all the beings of the divine-spiritual world. Now they were lonely within themselves — lonely is the same as &onuog. What was the human soul now lived in loneliness. This is also stated in the Greek text: Behold how it appears, how it speaks there in the loneliness of the soul — for my sake, say in the desolation of the soul — when the astral body could no longer spread out into the divine-spiritual world. Listen to how it calls in the desert of your soul, in the loneliness of your soul.
But what is being proclaimed in advance? We must now clarify what a very specific word meant when it was used in reference to soul phenomena, to spiritual phenomena in general, especially in Hebrew, but also in Greek: the word Kyrios. If one translates this as “the Lord,” as is usually done, one is translating utter nonsense. What is meant by it? Everyone in ancient times who uttered such a statement knew that it meant something connected with the spiritual progress of the human race. Therefore, they knew that the word Kyrios also referred to the secrets of the soul. When we look at the astral body, we have various forces in the soul. We usually call them thinking, feeling, and willing. The soul thinks, feels, and wills. These are the three forces that work in the soul. But they are the soul's serving forces. As human beings progressed in their development, these forces, which were formerly the masters to whom human beings were devoted—for human beings had to wait to see whether their thinking, feeling, and willing were called upon—these individual soul forces were subordinated to Kyrios, the Lord of the soul forces, the I. And nothing else was understood by the word when it referred to the soul than the I, which no longer held fast in the old sense: the divine-spiritual thinks, feels, and wills in me, but rather: I think, I feel, I will—the Lord asserts Himself in the soul forces. Prepare yourselves, human souls, to walk such soul paths that you awaken in your soul the strong I, Kyrios, the Lord in your soul. Hear how it calls in the loneliness of the soul. Prepare the power or the direction of the soul's Lord, the I. Open up his powers! - This is how one must translate it approximately: open up so that it can come in, so that it is not the slave of thinking, feeling, and willing; open up his powers! And if you translate these words: Behold, that which is the I-ness sends forth before you its angel, who shall give you the opportunity to understand how it calls in the loneliness of the astral soul; prepare the directions of the I, open up for it, for the I, the powers! — then you will have a meaning in these significant words of the prophet Isaiah; then you will have the reference to the greatest event in human development; then you will understand how Isaiah speaks of John the Baptist, how he points out that the loneliness of the human soul longs for the coming of the Lord in the soul, the I. And now the words become flesh and blood, and that is how we must understand such words.
And why was John the Baptist able to be the bearer of the Angelos? He was able to be so because he had undergone a very specific initiation. Initiations are specialized. They are not something general, they are specialized. For those individuals who have a very special task, an initiation must take place in a very specific way. Now, everything that happens in the spiritual world is provided for, so that what are actually spiritual facts are truly revealed in the heavens in the script of the stars. One can receive the solar initiation, that is, enter into the mysteries of the spiritual world, which is the world of Ahura Mazdao, of which the sun is the outer expression. But one can be initiated into the solar mysteries in twelve different ways, and each initiation is in a certain sense a solar initiation, but it is nevertheless different from the other eleven. Depending on whether a person has this or that task for the whole of humanity, he receives an initiation of which one can say: This is a solar initiation, but one that must be expressed by saying that the forces flow in as if the sun were in the sign of Cancer. This is different from receiving a solar initiation that must be expressed by saying: The forces flow in as if the sun were in the sign of Libra. These are expressions for different specialized initiations. And those individuals who have such a high task, such a high mission as that characterized here for John the Baptist, must be initiated in a very special way into a special initiation, because only from this can they have the strong power to carry out this mission in the world, even under very one-sided circumstances. And so, in order to become the bearer of the Angelos, John the Baptist underwent the solar initiation that can be called the initiation from the sign of Aquarius. Just as the sun stands in the sign of Aquarius, so this is a symbol of the kind of initiation that John the Baptist received in order to become the bearer of the angel, by taking in the power of the sun as it flows when it stands in relation to the other stars in such a way that it is described with the expression: it stands in the sign of Aquarius. That was the symbol. John had the Aquarius initiation. The sign was even given the name Aquarius because those who had undergone the Aquarian initiation had, as a spiritual initiation, the special ability to do with human beings what John did as the “Aquarius,” as the baptizer: namely, to truly enable people, through immersion in water, to free their etheric body to such an extent that they attained a self-knowledge that made it possible to understand what was most important at that time. People were immersed, and for a moment their etheric bodies were freed. Through baptism in the Jordan, people could feel the very special importance of this epoch in world history. That is why John was initiated into the baptismal initiation. And because this had to be expressed symbolically with the sun's rays flowing from the sign in which the sun stands, this sign was also called Aquarius. Thus, the name was transferred from the human ability. Today, a whole number of learned ignoramuses attempt to interpret spiritual events, so to speak, by bringing heaven down to earth. They say: Well, that means the advance of the sun. — All learned gentlemen who, in essence, know nothing, interpret human events from the sky. It was the other way around: what lives spiritually in human beings was transferred to the sky by using the sky as a means of expression. So that John the Baptist could say: I am the one who baptizes you with water. And that was the same as if he had said: I baptize you with water, I am endowed with the initiation of Aquarius. That would have been the words John the Baptist could have said to his intimate disciples. And just as the sun advances in the opposite direction to its sensual course when it moves opposite Aquarius, so the Virgin stands opposite, and then it moves to Libra. But if we take the initiation, we must take an opposite course on the other side: from Aquarius to Pisces. So John could say: Something will come that will no longer have to work as it corresponds to the working of the sun out of Aquarius, but as it corresponds to the working of the sun out of Pisces. One will come who will bring a higher baptism. When the spiritual sun rises higher, the baptism of Aquarius becomes the baptism out of spiritual water. The sun rises from Aquarius in the spiritual realm to Pisces. Hence the well-known sign of the fish for the bearer of Christ, which is an ancient symbol. For just as in John there was an Aquarian initiation through very special spiritual influences, so the initiation of which I have spoken to you here and there, which came about in a mysterious way through all the mysteries that took place around Jesus, was a Pisces initiation. An advance of the sun by one constellation—that was what placed Jesus of Nazareth in his time: that he was first subjected to a Pisces initiation.
And in the Gospel of Mark, this is, one might say, sufficiently hinted at; but such things can only be hinted at figuratively. Christ Jesus attracts all those who seek the fish. That is why his first apostles were all fishermen. And we can find what I have said, the advance toward the fish, tangible when we are told: I have baptized you with water, He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.
And when he came to the Sea of Galilee—that is, when the sun had come so far that its reflection could be seen rising from the fish—those who were called Simon and Simon's brother, James and James's brother, the fishermen, found themselves inspired in the appropriate way. And how can we understand all this? We cannot understand this unless we examine the language of that time a little more closely.
Our language today is philistine. When a person stands before us, we say, that is a person. When a second person stands before us, we say again, that is a person. A third — again one, and so on. But we have only the Maya before us. If a being has two legs and a human face, we have only one word in our philistine language: that is a human being. But what is a human being in occultism? Nothing but Maya, nothing at first, as it stands there before us, is the human being, really nothing. It is about as much as the rainbow that stands in the sky. How long is the rainbow something? Only as long as the conditions between rain and sunshine are present. When the sun and rain change their relationship, it is gone. It is the same with human beings. They are only a confluence of forces from the macrocosm. We must seek forces in the sky, here or there in the macrocosm. Where one might suspect a human being to be somewhere on Earth, there is nothing for the occultist. But forces flow down from above and up from below, and there they intersect. And just as the peculiar constellation of rain and sunshine produces the rainbow, so forces flowing together from above and below from the macrocosm produce a phenomenon that looks like a human being—that is the human being. Nothing is the human being as he stands before us. In truth, he is a shadow, a maya, an illusion. For what is real are the cosmic forces that intersect where our eye believes it sees a human being. Try to take seriously the expression: Man is nothing as he stands before us. He is the shadow of many forces. But the essence that reveals itself in man can be somewhere completely different from the point where man is walking around on his two legs. There are three people: one is a primitive Persian worker who works with a plow in ancient Persian agriculture. He looks like a human being. In reality, he is one of the souls that are fed in their powers from this or that world below or above. The second is perhaps a primitive Persian official. He is formed from another world by forces that intersect within him. If we want to know him, we must ascend to these forces. All of you sitting here are, in reality, somewhere else entirely. Only the forces of your actual being shine here. Then there stood a third Persian, of whom one had to say: He is truly a mere illusion, he is truly a shadow standing there. What was that in reality? One must go up to the sun; there are the forces that fed this shadow. Up there, among the secrets of the sun, one finds what can be called the golden star, Zarathustra. It sends down its rays, and down here stands a shadow called Zarathustra. In reality, his essence is not there at all. That is the third one.
Now, the important thing is that in ancient times people were aware of what such designations meant; that they did not give names as they do today, but named people after what lived within them, not after their outward appearance. We must be very clear about this. So that one could have said: An old man at the time of Christ would have understood very well if one had pointed to John the Baptist and said: Here is the Angelos of God. One would have taken into account only what had taken place; one spoke of the main thing, not of the secondary thing. And let us now suppose that the same expression was used of Christ Jesus himself. How would one have had to speak of Christ Jesus when one understood such things? Yes, to call this body in the flesh that walked on earth Christ Jesus would not have occurred to a person of that time in a dream; rather, it was the sign that what streamed down spiritually from the sun was caught in a very special way at this point. When this body, which was the body of Jesus, went from one place to another, it was the manifestation of the sun's power moving from one place to another. This sun's power could also go alone. At times the expression was used to mean that Christ Jesus was “at home” in the flesh, but what was in him continued to move even without his body. In the Gospel of John in particular, the expression is used in such a way that, under certain circumstances, when the same entity moves purely spiritually, the Gospel writer speaks exactly as if this solar power were dwelling in the physical body.
That is why it is so important that the deeds of Christ Jesus are always related to the physical sun, which is the outer expression of the spiritual world that is caught up at the point where the physical body wanders around. So when Christ Jesus heals, for example, it is the sun's power that heals. But it must be in the right place in the heavens: “When evening came, when the sun was setting, they brought to him all who were sick,” with illnesses and so on. It is important to indicate that this healing power can flow down when the outer sun has set, when the sun is only working spiritually. And when he needed a certain power again to work, he had to take it from the spiritual sun, not from the physical, visible sun. “And early in the morning, while it was still dark, he got up and went out.” — The path of the sun and the power of the sun is expressly indicated to us: that this power of the sun is at work, and that, basically, Jesus is only the outward sign that this path of the sun's power could also become visible to the mere outward eye. And wherever we read about Christ in the Gospel of Mark, we are referring to the sun's power, which became particularly effective during that epoch of our earth's development in that part of the world called Palestine. And one could see the sun's power: at this or that time, Christ went from place to place. One could just as well say: at that time, the spiritual power of the sun moved, as if gathered in a focal point, from one place to another. And the body of Jesus was the outward sign that made visible to the eyes how the sun's power moved. The paths of Jesus in Palestine were the paths of the sun's power that had descended to earth. And if you draw the steps of Jesus as a special map, you have a cosmic event: the working of the sun's power from the macrocosm into the land of Palestine. And this macrocosmic event is what matters. This is pointed out in particular by the writer of the Gospel of Mark, who was well aware that a body that was the carrier of such a principle as the Christ principle had to be overcome in a very special way by its principle. It was therefore the pointing out of precisely that world which Zarathustra so magnificently announced behind the sensory world, the pointing out of this world as it again influences the human world. Thus, through Christ Jesus, it was now indicated how the forces again influence the earth. Therefore, in the body, which, as we have seen, was in a certain way — even though it was already the body of the Nathanic Jesus — influenced by the Zarathustra individuality, a kind of repetition of the Zarathustra events had to take place.
Now we hear the great and beautiful legend of Zarathustra. When his mother gave birth to him, Zarathustra showed his first miracle, the famous Zarathustra smile. The second miracle was that the king of the district where Zarathustra was born, Duransarun, decided to murder Zarathustra, about whom the backward magicians had told him special things, but when he appeared to stab the child, his arm was paralyzed. That was the second miracle after the birth of Zarathustra. And so this king, who could not use his dagger against Zarathustra, had the child taken out to the wild animals of the desert. This is an expression of the fact that even in his earliest childhood, Zarathustra had to see what man must see when he looks out with impure eyes. Instead of the noble group soul and the noble, higher spiritual beings, he sees the outpouring of his wild imagination. This is the leading out into the desert to the wild animals, from which Zarathustra remains unharmed. This is the third of the miracles. The fourth was again a miracle among the wild animals, and so on. It was always the good spirits of Ahura Mazdao who served Zarathustra.
We find these miracles repeated in the Gospel of Mark: “And immediately the Spirit drove him into the desert” — actually it says solitude — “for forty days, and he was tempted by Satan, and was with the wild animals, and the angels served him.” Here we are shown that the body was prepared, as it were, like a focal point to receive what was happening in the macrocosm. What had happened to Zarathustra had to happen again: being led out to the wild animals. The body took in what came in from the macrocosm.
The Gospel of Mark places us in the greatest context right from the very first lines. And I wanted to show you how, when you understand the words in their true sense — not in today's philistine language, but in the ancient languages, where every word has living worlds behind it — when you understand it in the sense of these ancient languages, then the Gospel of Mark takes on new life, new power. But it must be said: Our modern language can only discover what was already contained in the words of the ancient languages through many paraphrases. What we say when we say: Man lives on earth and develops his ego; man used to live on the moon, where it was the angels who went through their human stage — all of this lies at the foundation of the words: “Behold, I send my angel before you.” These words cannot be understood without the prerequisite knowledge provided by spiritual science. And people today should be honest and say, when they read the words at the beginning of the Gospel of Mark: This is incomprehensible. Instead, they stand there in cheap arrogance and declare that spiritual science is a fantasy that puts all kinds of things into what they know in a simple way. The people of today simply do not know. And today we no longer have the principle that existed, for example, in ancient Persia, where the old sacred documents were rewritten from epoch to epoch in order to be clothed anew for each epoch. Thus the divine-spiritual word was transformed and transformed again as the Zend Avesta. And what we have today is the final form. The Persian Bible was rewritten seven times. And anthroposophy is supposed to teach people how necessary it is that the books in which the sacred secrets are written must be rewritten from epoch to epoch. For if one wants to preserve the great old style, one must not try to remain as close as possible to the old words. That is impossible; they are no longer understood. Instead, one must try to translate the old words into a direct understanding of the present. We tried this with Genesis in the summer. There you saw how some of the words have to be translated. Perhaps today you have gained a little insight into how the words in the Gospel of Mark also have to be translated.