Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

On the Occasion of Goethe's Birthday
GA 129

28 August 1911, Munich

The following lecture was given on, and dedicated to, the anniversary of Goethe's birthday, and in connection with the lecture series, Wonders of the World, Ordeals of the Soul and Revelations of the Spirit. This lecture is not a part of the 10 lectures in the above named lecture series, and was presumably translated from shorthand reports, unrevised by the lecturer, by an unknown translator.

My dear theosophical Friends!

The composition of “Faust” was Goethe's companion from his early years, on, one may say in the truest sense of the word,—till his death. For the second part of the poem was left behind by him, sealed, as his literary testament. The composition of certain important passages of the 2nd part of Faust really belongs to the closing years of that universal genius. Anyone who has had the opportunity of following Goethe's spiritual evolution, as revealed in his life-work, will discover many a thing of the most extreme interest, particularly in reference to the fact that Goethe's ideas continually altered regarding the course of development of his poem, when he returned again and again to this labour of his life. There is an interesting memorandum extant on the conclusion of “Faust” as it was intended to be, in accordance with Goethe's views of that date—a period which we may fix at the end of the ’eighties or beginning of the ’nineties of the eighteenth century. We find here, besides a few notes on the first and second parts, a short sentence containing an indication bearing on the conclusion of the poem. This scrap of writing shows the words jotted down in pencil by Goethe, “Epilogue in Chaos on the way to Hell.” This reveals to us that it was Goethe's intention at one time not to honour his Faust by the kind of apotheosis which forms the present conclusion of the poem, brought to an end in his extreme old age; but that, in accordance with the course indicated in the Prologue in Heaven,—from Heaven, through the world, to Hell—he desired to bring Faust to a conclusion with the Epilogue in Chaos on the Way to Hell. At that time Goethe entertained thoughts which led him to believe that knowledge which overstepped certain limits could only end in chaos. We may trace a certain connection between the frame of mind which prompted these words, which I quoted as Goethe's own, with that which was said yesterday regarding the ordeals of the soul; on the one hand the losing of itself in nothingness; on the other hand the descent into the turbid inner nature of the human being and the failure, in spite of all efforts, to find the junction. Goethe's personality was indeed one which compelled him to vanquish all difficulties, step by step, and to experience all vicissitudes in his own person. It is for this reason that all his creations leave such an impression of sincerity and truthfulness on us,—sometimes indeed the effect is so powerful that we cannot immediately keep pace with him; because it is impossible for us, unprepared, to transport ourselves into the particular phase of his personality prevailing at one period or another of his life. We may note a truly great advance in Goethe between the moment at which he intended to conclude his “Faust” with an epilogue in chaos on the way to hell, and that other period in which he brings his work to a close in the spirit of the monumental words “Wer immer strebend sick bemüht, den können wir erlösen.”1Approximately: “He who is ever striving, toils onward, him we can deliver.” For when Goethe, wrote the present, universally-known conclusion to his “Faust,” the premonition of which we spoke yesterday was alive within him, coupled with that inner strength which brings the assurance that, though we must pass through all ordeals of the soul, we shall-inevitably accomplish the closing of the circle described yesterday. This, my dear theosophical friends, is intended as a slight indication of the most pronounced characteristic in Goethe's life. Those among us who love a harmonious life, who cannot accommodate themselves to its contradictions, though these are the vital element in a progressive life reveals many contradictions, and that Goethe's judgment of many matters in his old age differed from that of his youth. But this was only because he was forced to conquer every truth for himself. Goethe's personality is a striking example of the necessity of the lessons of life; it shows us that it is precisely life on the physical plane which evokes direct inner experiences, and that life, with its succession of events, is needful for us, in order that we may become human beings in the true sense of the word. When we pass in review Goethe's whole life and contemplate its successive stages, we are struck by the universality of his genius, the magnificent comprehensiveness and many-sidedness of his mentality. It is most important to study Goethe precisely from this point of view, in his life-time, and also to measure by our own time the importance of that which he was by reason of the universality of his spirit, and then to ask ourselves how Goethe can above all things influence our own epoch by the universality of his genius.

It is well for us, then, to devote a little study to the inner character of the time in which we live,—to our present epoch and its spiritual culture. It is especially important for theosophists to consider attentively the spirit of our age. It is often said that we live in an age of specialists, in which exact science must reign supreme. How frequently do we hear the words of the great physicist Helmholtz repeated, namely, that at the present day there can be no mind comprehensive enough to embrace all the various branches of human knowledge, as they now exist. It has become absolutely proverbial that there can be no doctor universalis at the present day, and that one must be content with a general knowledge of special subjects. But when we consider that life is one and undivided, that everything in life is involved with everything else, and that life does not ask whether our souls are capable of comprehending what belongs to the common spiritual living organism of our age;—when we consider this we must conclude that it would be a disaster for our age, were it impossible to find, at least to some extent, the spirit ruling in all specialisation. And our quest will be easiest, if we endeavour to approach the subject precisely by those avenues opened up by theosophy or spiritual science. That science must be universal; it must be in a position to survey at a glance the branches of the various sciences in all the different domains of civilised life. To-day let us examine at least one aspect of our modern intellectual life, and see how it appears in the light of theosophy. As our time is limited, we will avoid those departments of science which are more or less unaffected by the passage of time, as least as to their nature and purpose, in spite of the enormous extensions which they have undergone in our day,—I mean mathematics, although even here we might point to the fact that the weighty deliberations carried on in certain branches of mathematics during the nineteenth century may be said to have opened up the supersensuous world to that science. But it must be mentioned that great and wonderful discoveries have been made in all branches of science in the course of the last few decades, which testify everywhere, when examined in the proper light, to the fact that the teachings of theosophy exactly agree with science; whereas none of the theories that have been applied to these discoveries up to the present day at all coincide with the facts which have been accumulated with so much diligence and energy for the last forty or fifty years. Taking, for example, chemistry and physics, we see how remarkable has been the tendency in the development of these branches in that period. When we were young, in the ’seventies or ’eighties or earlier, the so-called atomistic theories prevailed in chemistry and physics. These theories attributed all phenomena to particular kinds of vibration, either of ether or some other material substance. In short we might say that it was customary then to explain everything in the world, in the final instance, by the theory of vibration. Then as we approached the last decade of the nineteenth century, it was shown by the facts which gradually came to light that the theory of motion, or atomistic theory, was untenable. It may even be called a remarkable achievement (in the most limited sense of the word), that Professor Ostwald, who was chiefly noted as a chemist and natural scientist, brought forward at a congress in Lubeck, in place of the atomistic theory, the so-called theory of energy, or energetics. In a certain respect this was a progressive step; but the later discoveries in the field of chemistry and physics, down to our own times, have finally given rise to a considerable amount of scepticism and want of faith regarding all theoretical science. The idea of attributing external physical facts, such as the phenomena of light, etc., to the vibration of minute particles, or to a mere manifestation of energy, is now only entertained by unprogressive minds. This opinion is chiefly strengthened by all that has become known of late years regarding the substances which gave rise to the theory of radium; and we can already note the extraordinary circumstance that, owing to certain facts which have come to light by degrees, distinguished physicists such as Thomson and others have found themselves obliged to throw overboard all theories, first and foremost the ether hypothesis with its artistic forms of vibration, once cultivated with such extreme seriousness and assiduous application of the integral and differential calculus. The theory of motion was therefore fated to be discarded by the great physicists, who then returned to the vortices of Cartesius, a theory which may be said to be based on ancient occult traditions. But even these theories have been relinquished in their turn; a feeling of scepticism towards all theorising shows itself precisely in physics and chemistry, as a result of the conviction that all matter crumbles away, as it were, under the experiments of modern physical science. Things have gone so far that, in view of the advance of modern physical science, the theories of atomistic vibration and of energetics can no longer be upheld. All that might still have found a hearing 5, 6 or more years ago, all on which so many fond hopes were built, when we were young, when even the force of gravitation was ascribed to motion,—in the eyes of those acquainted with the real facts, all this has been demolished. But we still of course hear of extraordinary ideas on the part of the unprogressive. There is an interesting fact in this connection, which I might mention, as it is my intention to discuss certain characteristics of our own time and of Goethe. A little book has just appeared which also takes the standpoint that there is no such thing as gravitation, that is, that there is no attraction between matter and the planets.—It has always been a difficulty for science to support this so-called theory of attraction, because one must ask: How can the Sun attract the Earth, if it does not stretch anything out into space? Now within the last few days this book has appeared, in which attraction is ascribed to the effect of concussion. For instance, we represent to ourselves a body, whether planet or molecule, upon which impacts are continually being exercised from all sides by other planets or other molecular bodies, How does it happen that these bodies impinge upon one another from all sides? For of course they do impinge upon each other everywhere, one in this, another in the opposite direction, an so on.

Image 1

The essential point here is that when the number of impacts exercised from outside is compared with that produced by the bodies in the space between, the result is a difference. The last-mentioned are fewer and have less force than the outer. The consequence is that through the outer impacts the two bodies, whether molecules or planets, are driven together. According to this theory the force usually called attraction is attributed to the impacts of matter. It is refreshing to find something like a new thought now-a-days; but to any one who looks more deeply into the matter this theory is nothing more than refreshing. It is refreshing for the simple reason that the same theory had already been worked out with all possible mathematical quibbles. It is contained in a book, now out of print, written when I was a little boy, by a certain Heinrich Schramm, “The Universal Vibration of Matter as the First Cause of all Phenomena.” In this book the theory is much more thoroughly dealt with. Such ideas constantly reappear when scientists leave out of consideration the evolution of the spiritual life. In this respect the most extraordinary observations may be made;—errors caused by a one-sided view are repeated over and over again. What I should like to impress upon you above all is, that in consequence of the achievements of physics and chemistry of late years, abundant proofs have been furnished that that which is called matter is merely a human conception, which melts away under experiments, and that physics and chemistry, leaving behind all motion and energy, steer directly to the point at which matter merges into the spirit at its foundation. The body of facts accumulated by physics and chemistry already demand a spiritual foundation. Geology and paleontology are in a similar case. In these sciences more comprehensive theories, based upon vast aggregations of force, prevailed till about 1860–1870. To-day we find scepticism. everywhere; and among our best geologists and palaeontologists there is an inclination to restrict their labours to the bare registration of facts, because they dare not combine them in thought. A considerable amount of courage is needed to develop a system of thought embracing the series of facts before them. People are afraid to take the step now demanded even by geology and paleontology:—from the material to the spiritual,—a step which would transcend the Kant-Laplace theory. They dare not acknowledge that their imaginary universal nebula is finally merged in the spiritual regions, the world of the hierarchies, of which all that we might call the outer, physical, or perhaps the astrophysical theory, is but the garment. The case is different when we come to those sciences which have to deal more with life and the soul. We come in the first place to biology.

Now you all know how great were the hopes built on the progress of biology, the science of life, when Darwin's great work, “The Origin of Species”, appeared. Perhaps you also know that at the natural science Congress held in Stettin in the year 1863 Ernst Haeckel, with rare courage, extended to the human being the theory apparently applied by Darwin only to the animal, and we see that the science of biology afterwards developed in a remarkable way. We find cautious spirits who confine themselves more to the registration of facts; but others are there, who push forward impetuously, constructing daring theories on the results of investigations dealing with the relationship of forms among the different creatures. Foremost of all we find Haeckel boldly constructing pedigrees, showing how, from elementary forms of life, the most complicated structures have arisen through ever-new ramifications. But side by side with these more striking tendencies,—as we might call them—there is a line of investigation which it is also important to notice. This might be called the school of the anatomist, Carl Gegenbaur. In accordance with his nature, Gegenbaur was of opinion that, in the first place, we ought not to concern ourselves with the correlation existing between different creatures. He looked upon the Darwinian theory as a guiding principle of investigation, to be used as a standard, by the aid of which certain facts relating to the forms of living creatures could be traced. Let us suppose that the train of thought of a scientist might be expressed in the following words:—“I am not prepared to say that the higher animals might not be descended from the birds or fishes, but I will start from the principle that a relationship exists between them, and, keeping this in view, will examine the gills and fins, and will see whether more and more subtle resemblances do not come to light.” And in fact it was found that, by using Darwin's method as a clue, more and more important scientific facts were discovered. Important results were also arrived at when this method of research, stimulated by the Darwinian impulse, was applied to the descent of man, by following up all the evidence of paleontology and other archaeological records relating to geology. Wherever scientists have gone to work with caution, their method has been as follows: They begin by tracing the links, laying down Darwin's theory as a guiding principle. And here we have the astounding result that the Darwinian theory, used in this way, has shown itself to be extraordinarily fertile in results of late years, and that by the discoveries to which it has led up till the present time, it has contradicted and annulled itself! So that we may observe the remarkable fact, scarcely to be found to the same extent in any other domain of science, that the Darwinian scientists disagree on all points. Thus, there are still persons (certainly the very unprogressive) who relate the human being to the anthropoid apes still extant, or at least only slightly metamorphosed. There are some, particularly among those who pursue the modern analysis of the blood and the relationship among the components of the blood, who have returned to the older forms of the Darwinian theory. Katsch, for instance, affirms that it is impossible, in view of the facts which have come to light, to relate the human being to any animal form whatever now extant. All shades of opinion prevail, from that according to which man is related to the ape as he now exists,—on to others which diverge from the latter, but, following the descent of man is not traceable to the ancestors of these of these apes to any other mammals. It is held that we must retrace our steps to animals of which we can form no representation, and that from these man is descended on the one hand, while the mammals have branched off on the other hand, so that the apes are very distantly related to the human being. What strikes us as remarkable in this is the circumstance that when these scientists employ the forms familiar to us at present, in order to call up a picture of that real, primeval man, all existing physical forms dissolve into a nebulous mass;—the result is nil. How is this? Because there is a point in the science of biology, at which the outer physical facts arrived at by sincere effort, leads to the conclusion that the ancestors of man cannot be represented as physical beings, as all attempts in this direction fail. We at last arrive at the spiritual, primal form of man, the fruit of an earlier planetary evolution,—at that spiritual, primal man spoken of in theosophy. Precisely those facts which have been revealed by the researches of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries bear incontrovertible testimony to this truth, and the disagreement among scientists is concealed solely because the students only attend the lectures of one professor, and do not compare his teachings with those of others. If they compared the opinions of the various learned authorities, they would make strange discoveries. In the books of a certain naturalist they would find a passage very distinctly underlined, to the following effect: “If any of my students now preparing for his doctor's degree should propound this theory, which is brought forward by another, I would reject him unhesitatingly.” This assertion is however no exaggeration, it is only what is said by the professor of one university of his colleague of another university. And the disagreement mentioned is one of the most conspicuous phenomena in the field of biology; while in physics and chemistry the utmost resignation prevails with regard to theories. When we come to physiology we find still more singular conditions. We find that this science everywhere leads to the most extravagant theories. We see how even the mere outside husk of physiology is everywhere influenced by all sorts of things behind or within the physical, even among thinkers who, without knowing it, are yet absolute materialists in their mode of thought. I might mention hundreds of things in this connection, such for instance as the strange theories put forward of late years by a school of thought in Vienna, the so-called Freud school;—theories dealing with the manner in which the sub-conscious life of man, as it shows itself in dreams or other phenomena of life, comes within the domain of physiology. I can merely hint at these facts, and only mention them because they show that it is necessary everywhere, even theoretically speaking, that the mass of empirical facts of the outer senses be traced to spiritual causes. At the same time we find that the moment at which general comprehension, or conception of the impression necessarily made by science as a whole at the present day, makes itself felt, a kind of resignation sets in. In philosophy also we find the same resignation. You are probably aware that under the influence of William James in America, of Schiller in England and of other scholars in the philosophic field, a strange theory has been developed, which is really the outcome of a tendency inherent in facts, to strive towards their spiritual origin; but its followers nevertheless refuse recognise that origin in the spirit. This is the so-called pragmatism, which affirms that, in considering the various phenomena of life, we must, invent theories regarding them, as if they were capable of being combined; but that everything that we think out exists as an economy of the mind, and has no inner, constitutive, real value. This theory is the final refuse of the seared minds of the present day. It denotes the most absolute unbelief in the spirit, a reliance only on fragile theories, invented for the purpose of combining facts, and a failure to believe that the living spirit first implanted in the objects the thoughts which we find in them at last. The strangest fate of all sciences in this respect is reserved to psychology. There are certain psychologists who are incapable of finding the way to a living spirit, in which the soul finds itself as if reborn in the objects. On the other hand they cannot deny that, if any harmony at all can be established between the soul and the objects, something must be transferred to the objects from the soul. What is experienced in the soul must have something to do with the objects. And in connection with this, there is a curious word in circulation in German systems of psychology,—one which really flies in the face of all philological thought—the word “to feel into” (an object) (Einfühlen). There can be no clearer example of helping oneself out of a dilemma, than the use of such a word to avoid exact thought. As if it were of any importance that we should feel something into the objects, without being able to find in the things themselves the essential, real connection between the objects and that which we see in them. This is a state of forlornness, in which psychology finds itself bereft of the spirit, and tries to help itself out of the difficulty by the use of such a word. Thus we might find many similar masterpieces brought into existence at the present day by systems of psychology which cannot be taken seriously. Other systems of psychology confine themselves to a description of the outer instruments of the soul-life,—the brain, etc.; and it has gone so far that psychologists are listened to with respect when they prove by experiment that no force or energy absorbed or taken into our system in food and drink, is lost. This is supposed to prove that the law of the conservation of energy must also hold good for psychology, and that there is no such thing as a soul-nature independent of the body, and working apart through its bodily instruments. A conclusion such as this is perfectly illogical. One who can draw such a conclusion, and who is in a position to formulate such a thought at all, must also admit that it would be reasonable to stand in front of a bank, to calculate how much money is carried in and how much is carried out, and then to reckon how much remains in the coffers; and from this to draw the conclusion that there are no employees at work in the bank. Such conclusions are really drawn, and they are even regarded as scientific in our day. Theories like these are built up on the returns of modern research. They cast a veil over the real nature of the facts. We can observe the real status of psychology in a highly interesting personality, a truly remarkable man, who wrote a work on psychology in the ’seventies of the last century, Francis Brentano. He wrote the 1st. volume of a psychology which should have filled several volumes. Whoever is willing to follow the contents of the 1st. volume with an understanding of the real standpoint of psychological facts, must reflect that, considering the nature of the premise from which Francis Brentano starts, and if it be at all possible to advance on the basis of these premisses, his arguments must lead into spiritual science or theosophy. This is the only way open; and those who will not be led to spiritual science, or even will not make a slight effort to arrive at a reasonable comprehension of the life of the soul, may be supposed to be incompetent. And here we have the interesting fact that the first volume of a psychological work intended to embrace several volumes, had no successor. He only wrote the 1st. volume; and though Brentano dealt, in smaller works, with one or another of the problem which occupied him, he never found his way to spiritual science; hence he barred the way to any further progress in psychology.

By another and still more pregnant fact we may see how even the negative, principle, so conspicuous everywhere at present, demands that the thinkers who take their stand on the wonderful facts that have come to light during the last few decades, should tend towards spiritual science. This is doubtless a difficult step for many at the present day. Some are deterred by reasons into which we need not enter now; we will merely show how, on all hands, when we try to find the true forces in modern science, when we set to work with honesty and sincerity, comprehensively and energetically, the merging of science into theosophy is a necessary consequence. Farthest of all from the union with spiritual science is history, as it is written at the present day. The historians who apparently approach it most nearly,—those who do not merely regard history as a succession of fortuitous human impulses and passions and other facts belonging to the physical plane,—are those who recognise the existence of ruling thoughts. As if abstract thought could possibly have any influence! Unless we ascribe will to those thoughts, they cannot be spiritual powers, nor can they become active. To recognise governing ideas in history, therefore, apart from entities, is devoid of all sense. Not until active life has been infused into history, not until the spiritual life-principle is conceived as pervading the soul, expending itself ever more intensely as it passes from soul to soul,—not until history is understood as it is understood in “les Grands Inities” (by Édouard Shuré) has the point been reached at which that science merges into theosophy or spiritual sciences. Thus we may boldly affirm that it is evident to any unprejudiced observer that all learning imperatively calls for the theosophical mode of thought. Thinkers who penetrate deeply into the spiritual life, who follow the path of knowledge with heart and soul, and are not content merely to weave theories, but whose very heart is bound up with true knowledge,—spirits like these, it is true, show by their lives how life is everywhere in touch with spiritual science. As an example, I may cite a man who was known to the world for years as a celebrated poet, who was for long years condemned to a sick-bed and during that time wrote down the thoughts and experiences that came to him on the path of knowledge, as a bequest to posterity;—a poet who was not of course taken seriously as a philosopher, by philosophers. I mean Robert Hamerling. But the latter, who was perhaps only justly appreciated by Vincenz Knauer (who even made him the subject of lectures) was not a theoretical philosopher, but one who entered heart and soul on the paths of wisdom, and synthesised the sciences of chemistry, physics, philosophy, physiology, biology and history of modern times, as far as these were accessible to him, fertilising his knowledge by his poetic intuition. Robert Hamerling, who was able to fructify the thoughts regarding the world, by his own gift of poetic intuition, laid down in his “Atomistics of the Will” all that he found upon the path of knowledge. His path was not like that trodden by so many to-day, who start from the mere theory of some school of thought; it led directly from life itself. In his “Atomistics of the Will,” he has written much of importance for those who take an interest in the tendency of ordinary learning and intellectuality to merge into spirituality. A passage from the “Atomistics of the Will” written in 1891, will follow here as an example of the thoughts collected by him in his solitude, on the evolutionary path of knowledge on which he had entered. “It is possible,” says Hamerling on p. 145 of Vol.II. of “Atomistics of the Will,” “ that living beings exist, whose corporeality is more tenuous than atmospheric air. At regards other heavenly bodies, at least, nothing can be urged against this supposition. Beings whose corporeality is of such extreme subtlety would be invisible to us, and would exactly correspond to those beings ordinarily called spirits, or to the etheric bodies, or souls surviving after the death of individuals ... ” He continues in the same strain. Here we have an allusion to the etheric body in the middle of a book which is the outcome of the intellectual life of the present day. Let us suppose that truth and uprightness everywhere prevailed, together with an earnest striving to know what really lives in the thought of men; let us imagine that an honest desire existed to try to understand what we already possess; that, in other words, people should write fewer books, until they have learnt the content of other books already written,—then the work done in our time would be very different; there would be continuity in it. Were this so, it would have to be admitted that, during the last few decades, spiritual life has been breaking forth, and vistas opening of spiritual aims and perspectives, wherever science has been honestly and earnestly prosecuted. For there are many examples like that of Robert Hamerling.

Thus the special branches of the various sciences unite and demand that which can alone give a comprehensive view of the world at the present day, such as I have endeavoured to sketch lately in “Occult Science”. Into that work are woven, imperceptibly, the latest results of all the sciences, side by side with spiritual research. When we consider this we must acknowledge that open doors to spirituality are everywhere to be found; but we pass them by unnoticed. Whoever is acquainted with modern science finds without exception that its facts, not its theories, require a spiritual explanation. Were it possible for ordinary science to emancipate itself from all theories—the atomic, the vibratory, energetics and all other forms of one-sidedness with which the world is continually hedged about by a few stock ideas,—if scientists could only liberate themselves from such trammels; did they allow the great mass of facts now brought to light by science to speak for themselves, all contradiction between the spiritual science which we follow here and the genuine results of modern research would cease. Here, Goethe may be our great helper—Goethe, who fulfilled all the conditions of a universal mind so magnificently. He fulfilled those conditions even outwardly; for whoever is acquainted with Goethe's correspondence knows that he exchanged letters with countless naturalists on all the most important questions in the various departments of science. From his experimenting cabinets and from his study, communications went forth to the different branches of science at all points of the compass. He corresponded with botanists, opticians, zoologists, anthropologists, geologists, mineralogists and historians, in short with scientists in every field. And though unprogressive minds certainly refused to recognise him as an authority, because his investigations were beyond their understanding, he found other thinkers by whom he was most highly appreciated, and who consulted him when it became necessary to settle any question of special interest. This is an incident of no great importance, but at the same time we can see how Goethe worked in thought and also in deed with the foremost philosophers of his day, such as Schelling and Hegel. We find that the minds of a number of philosophers were fructified by him, and that Goethe's thoughts reappeared in their work, in the same or another form. Finally we can see how in the course of his life Goethe seriously occupied himself with the study of botany, zoology, osteology in particular, also with anthropology in a wider sense; further with optics and physical science in their wider scope. Isolate scientists in the domain of biology are now showing a disposition to do justice to Goethe in a small degree. On the other hand it is quite comprehensible that physicists are perfectly sincere in their inability to understand Goethe's teachings regarding colour, from their own standpoint. These truths regarding colour can only be understood in the future,—unless the acquaintance with theosophy has meantime brought about a change,—perhaps not before the second half of the twentieth, or even the first half of the 21st. century. The physical science of the present day can only look upon Goethe's ideas regarding colour as nonsense; this however is no fault of the teaching; the fault lies in the forms of modern science. If you read my book, “Goethe's Conception of the World,” also the preface to Goethe's works on natural science, published by Kirschner, you will see what I mean. You will see that the latter contains an appreciation, of Goethe's theory of colour, which is scientific in the truest sense, and, compared with which, all modern theories relating to physical science are mere dilettantism. Thus we see how Goethe laboured in all departments of science. We can see how his endeavours to understand the laws of nature were everywhere fertilised by the poetic forces of his genius. Goethe looked upon nothing as separate from the rest; everything intermingled in his soul. There no one pursuit interferes with another. Goethe is himself a proof that it is an absurdity to believe that the active pursuit of some branch of intellectual knowledge could hamper intuition. If both impulses are only present in strength and originality, they do not interfere with one another. We can form an idea of the living cooperation of the human forces of the soul, as they are expressed in the different sciences, and in the entire personality of the human being; the necessity of life makes it possible for us to form such an idea, and we are helped by the fact that a modern intelligence exists, in whom this cooperation of the different soul-forces of the whole personality was actually living. It is for this reason that Goethe's personality is a model, to which we must look up in order to study that living cooperation of the soul-forces. As he is a man whose progress we can watch from year to year, in the deepening of his own inner life and understanding of the world, he is an example to us of the manner in which man must strive, in order to attain a greater intensity of the inner life. Not the mere contemplation of Goethe, not the repetition of his words, nor even devotion to his works should be our duty on a day which the calendar shows us to be closely connected, in a narrow sense, with Goethe's life,—but to consider the grandeur that radiates from his whole person, in the light of a model for our epoch. Especially the scientific thinker of our day might learn much from Goethe. For in respect to the comprehension of the spiritual life, scientific thought is not in a flourishing condition; but precisely from that quarter we shall inevitably live to see a great revival of Goethe, and a gradual and increasing understanding of his genius. A contemplation of Goethe's life may throw a flood of light on our advance to spirituality, on theosophy in general; it will illuminate our progress healthfully, because in Goethe everything is healthy. He is trustworthy in every particular, and, where he contradicts himself, it is not his logic that is at fault. Life itself is a contradiction, and must be so in order that it may continue to live. This is a thought which I would fain kindle in you on this birthday of Goethe's, to show how necessary it is that we should become absorbed in the things lying open to us. Goethe can give us an infinity. We can learn most from him if we forget much that has been written in the countless works extant on Goethe, for such communications are more likely to cast a veil over the real Goethe than to make us acquainted with him. But Goethe has an occult power of attraction; there is something in him which works of itself. If we yield ourselves up to Goethe we shall find that we can celebrate his birthday within ourselves, and we shall feel something of that which is ever young and fresh in Goethe, of which we might say that Goethe may rise again in a soul steeped in theosophy. Though Goethe's name is so often heard and his works so often quoted, our materialistic age has but a meagre understanding of him. There was a time when people were really fascinated, even by very serious discussions on the subject of Goethe,—not literary and historical discussions in our sense of the word, for these are not serious. When Goethe was the subject of serious talk there were always listeners who were carried away by that inner spiritual vein which is never wanting in Goethe. We may recall the time when old Karl Rosenkranz, the Hegel scholar, who was on a level with the highest culture of his day, ventured between 1830 and 1840 to announce a series of lectures on Goethe at the university of Königsberg. He wished to state frankly a philosopher's opinion of Goethe. He prepared his lectures, and left his study with the thought: “Perhaps one or two may come to hear what I have to say!”—But thought nearly died within him, when he found himself outside in the midst of a wild snowstorm, so violent that no one could be expected to venture out to a lecture that was not obligatory. He made his way to the lecture-hall and behold, nothing could be more unfavourable than the conditions under which he had to deliver his lecture. It was a hall which could not be heated, the floor was in bad repair, and the walls ran water in streams. But the name of Goethe was an attraction and there was a good audience, even on the first evening, and though at each lecture the conditions grew worse, and the hall more uncomfortable, the audience grew more and more numerous. Finally the attendance at Karl Rosenkranz' lectures was so great that the hall could scarcely contain it.

Goethe is one of those thinkers who can best stimulate us theosophically. A healthy view of Goethe would be to regard him, in the light of theosophy, as a great spirit incarnated in the body of Goethe,—a spirit whom we must first learn to understand. We must not allow him to be represented to us as a fleshly form in which there dwells a great spirit whom we are bound to take on authority. There are really safe paths leading to theosophy, it is only necessary to follow them, without shrinking from the trouble. This is why I never hesitate, even when great numbers are present at a course of lectures, to shed light, sometimes in a manner inconvenient perhaps to many, on some bye-path of spiritual knowledge, to risk a bold assertion or to make a statement difficult to understand. I should never shrink from such a step, because I know that only in this way is it possible for theosophy to make sound progress, or to take root in modern civilised life. It seems to me that we may mount to the highest spiritual regions without losing our warmth of heart; it seems to me that all those assembled here must be conscious to some degree of the truth, that the methods applied to the interpretation of theosophy here are those of the most modern intellectual life, and the strange opinion which prevails even in theosophical circles, that a réchauffé of mediaeval learning is served up here, instead of facts in agreement with modern science, is a very grave departure from the truth. As this has been pronounced by many—even among theosophists—it must be pointed out that anyone who can follow with understanding will be convinced that no mediaeval learning, but the union of objective, scientific teachings with genuine, modern spiritual aspirations, is our aim. It is not my province to judge how far this object has been attained; but it ought to be clear to everyone that nothing mediaeval in its character, nor anything merely associated with traditions, but objective knowledge, on a level with modern science, is the object of our study here. It should also be experienced as a certainty that the conditions of life which are the outcome of our theosophical studies are able to fill our hearts with enthusiasm. What seems to me of most importance is that what our hearts have gained from such a course of study and we carry away with us into the world,—what we have grasped in the breadth of the conceptions and words, is concentrated in our hearts; it lives itself out in our feelings and sensations, in our compassion and in our actions, and we are then living theosophy. As the rivers can only flow over the lands when they have been fed by the sources, so the life of theosophy can only stream out into the world, when it draws its forces from the springs of wisdom open to us to-day by those spiritual Powers whom we call the Masters of Wisdom and of the Harmony of Feelings. And we have grasped the true meaning of the word theosophy, or spiritual science, when it speaks to us in the forms of modern, intellectual life, when, at the same time, instead of leaving, our hearts and souls cold, it warms them, so that that warmth may communicate itself to others everywhere in the world. In proportion as you carry out into the world what has been said here, not only in your thoughts, but also in your feelings, your impulses of will and your actions, these lectures will have served their purpose. This is the aim of these lectures. With this wish, my dear theosophical friends, I always welcome you from the heart when you come, and with the same wish I take leave of you on this day, at the close of our series of lectures, with the words: “Let us remain united in the theosophical, in the intellectual and spiritual sense, even though we must live in space separated one from the other and from the present time, in which we can be more closely united in space; let us take, as the most inspiring mutual greeting and farewell, the thought that we are together in spirit, even when we are dispersed in space. In this spirit I take leave of you to-day, on the occasion of our celebration of Goethe's birthday, at the close of our course of lectures. Let us think often of the object which has brought us together, and may it also bear fruit for that personal bond which may always unite one theosophist with another in love. May we be together in this sense, even after we have parted, and may we ever anew be drawn together again, that we may rise to heights of spiritual and supersensuous life.

Elfter Vortrag

Zum Geburtstag Goethes

Die Faust-Dichtung hat Goethe begleitet von seinen Jugendjahren an - man darf wohl im eigentlichsten Sinne des Wortes sagen - bis zu seinem Tode. Denn der zweite Teil des «Faust» war von Goethe eingesiegelt als sein literarisches Testament hinterlassen worden. Und die Fertigstellung einzelner wichtiger Partien dieses «Faust», des zweiten Teiles, gehört ja wirklich den letzten Lebensjahren dieses universellen Geistes an. Wer Gelegenheit hat, Goethe ein wenig zu verfolgen in seiner Geistesentwickelung, wie sie sich in dieser Lebensdichtung äußert, der wird manche höchst interessante Dinge erleben können, namentlich über die Art und Weise, wie Goethe, wenn er immer wieder und wieder an dieses Gedicht, sein Lebensgedicht, ging, stets zu anderen Ideen kam über die Art, wie es verlaufen sollte. So gibt es eine interessante Aufzeichnung über den Schluß des Goetheschen «Faust», wie er einmal nach den damaligen Anschauungen Goethes hätte werden sollen, die wir etwa in die letzten achtziger oder Anfang der neunziger Jahre des 18. Jahrhunderts zu verlegen haben. Da finden wir neben ein paar Aufzeichnungen - Disposition wäre nicht das richtige Wort dafür - über den ersten und zweiten Teil einen kurzen Satz, eine Andeutung über den Schluß. Und diese Andeutung enthält die Worte von Goethe mit Bleistift hingeschrieben: Epilog im Chaos auf dem Wege zur Hölle. - Daraus werden Sie ersehen, daß Goethe einmal daran dachte, seinem Faust am Schlusse nicht jene Art von Himmelfahrt angedeihen zu lassen, die jetzt dasteht in dem Gedicht, das er in höchstem Greisenalter vollendet hat, sondern daß er im Sinne jenes Ganges, der im Vorspiel angedeutet ist - vom Himmel durch die Welt zur Hölle -, «Faust» wollte schließen lassen mit einem «Epilog im Chaos auf dem Wege zur Hölle». Es waren damals Gedanken, die in Goethes Seele lebten und die dahin gingen, daß Erkenntnis, wenn sie gewisse Grenzen überschreitet, nur in ein Chaos hineinführen kann. Und wir dürfen in einer gewissen Weise die Stimmung, aus der diese Worte hervorgegangen sind, die ich Ihnen als Goethesche Worte anführen konnte, zusammenbringen mit dem, was gestern gesagt werden konnte über unsere Seelenprüfungen, wenn die Seele auf der einen Seite ins Nichts hinaus, auf der anderen Seite in die dichte innere Wesenheit des Menschen untertaucht und den Zusammenschluß noch nicht finden kann. Goethe ist eine Persönlichkeit, die sich in der Tat Schritt für Schritt alles erobern mußte, die alles persönlich durchmachen mußte. Daher wirkt alles das, was Goethe geschaffen hat, so aufrichtig und so ehrlich auf uns, freilich manchmal auch so groß, daß wir es nicht gleich verfolgen können, weil wir uns nicht immer sogleich in die individuelle Ausgestaltung der Persönlichkeit hineinfinden können, die bei Goethe in diesem oder jenem Zeitpunkte seines Lebens vorhanden war. Wir dürfen daher einen wirklich großen Fortschritt Goethes verzeichnen von dem Zeitpunkte, da er seinen «Faust» mit einem «Epilog im Chaos auf dem Wege zur Hölle» schließen lassen wollte, bis zu jenem Zeitpunkte, wo er ganz im Sinne des lapidaren Satzes schließt: «Wer immer strebend sich bemüht, den können wir erlösen.» Denn als Goethe den gegenwärtig überall bekannten Schluß seines «Faust» niederschrieb, lebte in ihm jene Ahnung, von der gestern gesprochen worden ist, aber auch jene Energie, die uns die Sicherheit gibt, daß, wenn wir auch durch alle Seelenprüfungen hindurch müssen, wir endlich doch zu dem Zusammenschlusse kommen müssen, der gestern gekennzeichnet worden ist. Das sei gesagt, meine lieben Freunde, um ein wenig auf das hinzuweisen, ‚was der hervorstechendste Zug in Goethes Leben ist.

Diejenigen Menschen, welche geradliniges Leben lieben, welche scheuen, sich in die Widersprüche hineinzufinden, die doch das Lebendige eines fortschreitenden Lebens bedeuten, werden Anstoß nehmen daran, daß, wenn man ernstlich nachgeht, man in der Tat manchen Widerspruch in Goethes Leben findet, daß Goethe über viele Dinge im Alter anders geurteilt hat als in seiner Jugend. Das rührt aber nur davon her, daß Goethe jede Lebenswahrheit sich erst erkämpfen mußte. Und gerade an der Persönlichkeit Goethes zeigt sich, wie dieses Leben unmittelbar am physischen Plane herausfordert die inneren Erlebnisse, wie notwendig dieses Leben in seinem sukzessiven Geschehen ist, um uns zum völligen Menschen zu machen. Denn was uns so grandios bei Goethe zutage tritt, wenn wir sein ganzes Leben überblicken und uns einlassen auf seine aufeinanderfolgenden Stadien: das ist die Universalität seines Geistes, das Umspannende, Allseitige dieses Geistes. Und es ist höchst wichtig, Goethe gerade von dieser Seite in seiner Zeit zu studieren und auch das, was er durch das Universelle seines Geistes war, an unserer Zeit zu messen und dann einmal zu fragen: Was kann Goethe gerade für unsere Zeit durch das Universelle seines Geistes sein?

Da ist es gut, wenn wir ein klein wenig die innere Beschaffenheit unserer Zeit, unserer Gegenwart, unserer Geisteskultur betrachten. Für den Anthroposophen hat es ja eine ganz besondere Wichtigkeit, den Geist unseres Zeitalters einmal ins Auge zu fassen. Es wird ja oft gesagt, unsere Zeit sei die Zeit des Spezialistentums, die Zeit, in welcher die strenge Wissenschaft regieren muß. Und oft und oft werden die Worte im Munde geführt, die ein großer Physiker, Helmholtz, gebraucht hat: daß es in unserer Zeit keinen die einzelnen Zweige des menschlichen Wissens — wie sie heute bestehen - umfassenden Geist geben kann. Es ist geradezu zum Schlagwort geworden, daß es einen Doctor universalis unserer Zeit nicht geben könne, daß man sich begnügen müsse mit dem Überblick über diese oder jene Spezialität. Wenn man beachtet, daß das Leben aber ein Einheitliches ist, daß alles im Leben zusammengreift und daß sich das Leben nicht danach richtet, ob wir mit unserer Seele umfassen können, was zum gesamten geistigen Lebensorganismus unserer Zeit gehört, so müssen wir sagen: Es wäre eigentlich schlimm für unser Zeitalter, wenn es nicht möglich wäre, wenigstens den Geist, der in allem Spezialistentum waltet, in gewisser Weise gewinnen zu können. Und man wird ihn am leichtesten gewinnen können, wenn man durch jene Zugänge vorzudringen versucht, welche gerade die Geisteswissenschaft eröffnen kann. Sie muß universell sein, sie muß die Spezialitäten der einzelnen Wissenschaften und der einzelnen Gebiete des ganzen Kulturlebens in gewisser Weise mit einem Blicke überschauen. Und wenigstens von einer Seite her wollen wir einmal heute einen Blick darauf werfen, wie sich im Lichte der Geisteswissenschaft gerade unser gegenwärtiges Geistesleben ausnimmt. Wir werden nicht sprechen, weil die Zeit nicht dazu ausreicht, von denjenigen wissenschaftlichen Gebieten, die mehr oder weniger für alle Zeiten gleichbleiben, wenigstens ihrem Sinn und Geist nach, trotzdem sie so gewaltige Bereicherungen in unserer Zeit erfahren haben. Wir wollen absehen von dem mathematischen Gebiete, obwohl wir auch da hinweisen könnten darauf, daß die Mathematik des 19. Jahrhunderts durch ihre ernsten Erwägungen in gewissen Zweigen sich geradezu das übersinnliche Gebiet erobert hat. Aber wir wollen darauf hinweisen, daß in den verschiedensten Zweigen moderner Wissenschaft im Laufe der letzten Jahrzehnte gewaltige große Entdeckungen gemacht worden sind, die, wenn man sie im richtigen Lichte schaut, überall uns zeigen, daß die geisteswissenschaftliche Auslegung genau zu ihnen stimmt, während alles das, was an Theorien bis in unsere Zeit herein beigebracht worden ist, durchaus nicht zu den Tatsachen stimmt, die mit so großem Fleiße und Energie im Laufe der letzten Jahrzehnte zusammengetragen worden sind. Da sehen wir schon an dem einen Beispiele der Physik und Chemie, wie merkwürdig der Gang der Entwickelung in den letzten Jahrzehnten war.

Als wir jung waren - in den siebziger, achtziger Jahren oder vorher -, da gab es in der Physik und Chemie die sogenannten atomistischen Theorien, welche alle Erscheinungen auf gewisse Schwingungsformen zurückführten, sei es des Äthers, sei es irgendwelcher anderen materiellen Substanz. Und man möchte sagen: Dazumal war es Mode, alles, was uns in der Welt entgegentritt, letzterhand auf Bewegungen zurückzuführen. Dann, mehr gegen die neunziger Jahre des 19. Jahrhunderts, zeigte es sich durch die Tatsachen, die allmählich zutage traten, daß die Bewegungslehre, die atomistische Theorie, nicht mehr gut ging, und es war in gewisser Beziehung eine bedeutungsvolle Tat, aber im allereingeschränktesten Sinne, als der vorzugsweise als Chemiker und Naturforscher bekannte Ostwald auf der Versammlung in Lübeck an Stelle jener atomistischen Theorie die sogenannte Energetik, die Energietheorie, aufstellte. Das war in gewisser Beziehung ein Fortschritt. Aber das, was später bis in unsere Zeiten herein sich auf dem Gebiete der Physik und Chemie gezeigt hat, hat endlich dazu geführt, daß eine gewisse Skepsis, ein gewisser Unglaube eingetreten ist gegenüber allem Theoretischen. Und nur zurückgebliebene Geister denken heute noch daran, die äußeren physikalischen Tatsachen wie die Lichterscheinungen oder sonstigen physikalischen oder chemischen Tatsachen auf die Bewegungen kleinster Teile oder auf bloße Äußerungen von Energien zurückzuführen. Dazu mußte ja insbesondere dasjenige beitragen, was in den letzten Jahren über die Stoffe bekannt wurde, die zur Radiumtheorie führten, und es ist schon die merkwürdige Tatsache eingetreten, daß große Physiker, wie zum Beispiel Thomson und andere, durch gewisse Verhältnisse, die nach und nach herausgekommen sind, sich gezwungen sahen, alle Theorie im Grunde genommen über Bord zu werfen, vor allem die Äthertheorie mit ihren kunstvollen Schwingungsformen, die man einst mit so großem Ernste betrieben und in so emsiger Arbeit mit Differentialen und Integralen berechnet hatte. Dieser Bewegungstheorie ist es also geschehen, daß die großen Physiker sie über Bord geworfen haben und in gewisser Weise zu einer Art von Wirbeltheorie zurückgelangt sind, die sich schon unter Cartesius herausgebildet hatte, man darf sagen auf Grund alter okkulter Traditionen. Aber selbst diese Theorien ließ man wieder fallen, und eine gewisse Skepsis gegenüber allem Theoretisieren ist gerade auf physikalischen und chemischen Gebieten eingetreten, nachdem man gesehen hat, daß einem die Materie sozusagen in der Hand zerfallen ist unter den modernen physikalischen Experimenten. Es ist so, daß gegenüber der heutigen Physik, wie sie sich bis in unsere Tage herein entwickelt hat, die atomistischen Bewegungstheorien und Energietheorien nicht mehr haltbar sind. Alles das, was vor fünf, sechs oder ein paar Jahren mehr noch hätte vertreten werden können, worauf so viele Hoffnungen gesetzt worden sind, als wir jung waren, wo man selbst die Schwerkraft zurückführte auf Bewegung, ist in den letzten Jahren für diejenigen, die die Tatsachen kennengelernt haben, in nichts zerfallen. Man erlebt aber natürlich immer wieder von denen, die zurückbleiben, die merkwürdigsten Tatsachen. Da möchte ich Sie auf etwas Interessantes hinweisen, da ich heute ja besprechen will, was die Zeit und Goethe charakterisieren soll.

Es ist ein Büchelchen erschienen, das sich ungefähr auch auf den Standpunkt stellt, daß es keine Schwerkraft gibt, das heißt, daß die Materie und die Weltenkörper nicht einander anziehen. Das war ja immer eine Schwierigkeit für die Wissenschaft, diese sogenannte Anziehung vertreten zu können, weil man sich sagt: Wie kann die Sonne die Erde anziehen, wenn sie nicht irgend etwas ausstreckt in den Raum hinein? Da kam in den letzten Tagen diese Schrift, welche die Anziehung zurückführt auf Stoßwirkungen, so daß, wenn wir zum Beispiel einen Körper haben, einen Weltenkörper oder auch nur Moleküle, fortwährend von allen Seiten durch die anderen Weltenkörper und Moleküle Stöße ausgeübt werden. Wieso kommt es, daß diese Körper von allen Seiten stoßen? Denn natürlich stoßen sie auch innen, das eine geht hin, das andere her und so weiter. Das Wesentlichste würde jetzt sein, wenn Sie die Menge von Stößen, die außen und innen ausgeübt werden, und dann die Stöße, die dazwischen ausgeübt werden, ins Auge fassen, daß sich da eine Differenz ergibt. Die Stöße, die dazwischen ausgeübt werden, sind weniger und üben kleinere Kräfte aus als die äußeren. Die Folge ist, daß durch die äußeren Stöße die beiden - seien es Moleküle, seien es Weltenkörper — zusammengetrieben werden. So wird zurückgeführt auf die Stöße der Materie das, was wir als Anziehungskraft sonst bezeichnen. Niedlich ist, wenn man heute so etwas wie einen neuen Gedanken findet, aber für diejenigen, die den Sachen nachgehen, ist es eben nur niedlich. Aus dem einfachen Grunde zum Beispiel ist es niedlich, weil, als ich noch ein ganz junger Knabe war, diese Theorie mit allen mathematischen Schikanen von einem gewissen Heinrich Schramm in einem Buche ausgeführt worden ist, das allerdings heute vergriffen ist: «Die allgemeine Bewegung der Materie als Grundursache aller Naturerscheinungen.» Dort ist das viel gründlicher gemacht. Solche Dinge treten immer wieder auf bei denen, welche die Entwickelung des Geisteslebens nicht ins Auge fassen. Da kann man die merkwürdigsten Dinge erleben, wie vom einseitigen Standpunkte her immer wieder und wieder dieselben Irrtümer gemacht werden. Ich möchte geradezu betonen, wie durch das, was Physik und Chemie in den letzten Jahren geleistet haben, lauter Beweise dafür geliefert worden sind, daß dasjenige, was man Materie nennt, nur eine Vorstellung der Menschen ist und unter dem Experimente zerfällt und daß über alle Bewegung, über alle Energie hinweg Physik und Chemie direkt auf den Punkt hinsteuern, wo die Materie einläuft in den ihr zugrunde liegenden Geist. Eine spirituelle Grundlage fordert heute schon die Tatsachenwelt der Physik und Chemie heraus.

In einem ganz ähnlichen Falle ist die Geologie oder die Paläontologie. Da gab es noch bis in die sechziger und siebziger Jahre des 19. Jahrhunderts gewisse umfassendere Theorien, die große Kraftkomplexe ins Auge faßten. Heute sehen wir überall Skepsis, und bei denjenigen, die unsere besten Geologen oder Paläontologen sind, sehen wir ein Sichbeschränken darauf, rein die Tatsachen zu registrieren, weil man es nicht wagt, sie durch Gedanken zusammenzufassen. Es gehört ja ein gewisser Mut dazu, Gedanken zu entfalten, welche die entsprechenden Tatsachenreihen zusammenfassen. Man fürchtet sich aber heute, den Schritt zu machen, den auch die Geologie und Paläontologie fordert: von dem Materiellen in das Geistige hinein, den Schritt, der auch über die KantLaplacesche Theorie hinausführen würde. Man wagt es nicht, anzuerkennen, daß das, was ein erträumter Weltennebel ist, zuletzt einläuft in das Geistige, in die Gesamtheit der Hierarchien, von denen nur ein äußeres Kleid alles das ist, was man die äußere physikalische oder meinetwillen astrophysische Theorie nennen könnte.

Anders liegen nun die Dinge, wenn wir mehr zu jenen Wissenschaften heraufkommen, die sich dem Leben oder mehr der Seele nähern. Da finden wir zunächst die Biologie. Nun, Sie wissen, welch gewaltige Hoffnungen an die Fortschritte der Biologie, der Lebenslehre, geknüpft worden sind, als das große Werk von Darwin erschien über «Die Entstehung der Arten». Sie wissen vielleicht auch, daß in den sechziger Jahren Ernst Haeckel mit einer seltenen Kühnheit auf der Naturforscherversammlung in Stettin 1863 das, was Darwin scheinbar bis dahin nur auf das Tierreich ausgedehnt hatte, auf den Menschen ausdehnte. Und dann sehen wir eine merkwürdige Entwickelung in bezug auf diese Lebenslehre oder Biologie. Wir sehen die vorsichtigeren Geister, die sich mehr auf das Registrieren der Tatsachen beschränken, aber auch andere, die da vorwärtsstürmen und kühne Theorien aufbauen auf das, was sich durch die Untersuchungen der Verwandtschaft der Formen der einzelnen Lebewesen ergibt. Insbesondere Haeckel sehen wir in kühner Weise auftreten und Stammbäume konstruieren, wie aus den einfachen Lebewesen die kompliziertesten durch immer neue und neue Abzweigungen entstanden sein sollen.

Aber neben diesen, man möchte sagen, schroffer ins Auge fallenden Richtungen findet sich eine Forschungsströmung, die auch wichtig zu berücksichtigen ist und die ich charakterisieren möchte durch den Namen des Anatomen Carl Gegenbaur. Gegenbaur war in seinem Wesen der Anschauung, daß man zunächst nicht fragen soll, wie sich das alles verhält, diese Verwandtschaft der einzelnen Lebewesen. Aber er betrachtet die Darwinistische Theorie so, daß, wenn man sie als ein regulatives Forschungsprinzip zugrunde legt, man dann nachgeht gewissen Tatsachen in der äußeren Formen- oder Lebewelt. Sagen wir, die Stimmung eines solchen Forschers könnte man ausdrücken mit den Worten: Ich will nicht gleich sagen, daß meinetwillen die höheren Tiere von den Vögeln oder Fischen abstammen, aber ich will das Prinzip zugrunde legen, daß eine Verwandtschaft besteht, und will die Kiemen und Flossen daraufhin untersuchen, will untersuchen, wie sich immer feinere und feinere Verwandtschaften ergeben. — Und da haben sich allerdings, indem man so wie ein Leitmotiv des Aufsuchens die Darwinistische Arbeit betrachtet hat, wichtige und immer wichtigere Forschungstatsachen ergeben. Diese haben sich aber auch da ergeben, wo diese Forschung - angeregt durch den Darwinistischen Impuls - darauf aus war, die Abstammung des Menschen zu untersuchen, nachzugehen all den Zeugnissen der Paläontologie, der Geologie.

Man ist überall, wo man vorsichtiger war, so vorgegangen: Man will die Verwandtschaften aufsuchen, will zugrunde legen einfach wie ein leitendes Prinzip die Darwinistische Theorie. Und da hat sich das Merkwürdige ergeben, daß die Darwinistische Theorie als solch leitendes Prinzip sich in den letzten Jahren als etwas ungemein Fruchtbares erwiesen hat und daß durch die Tatsachen, zu denen sie bis zu unserer heutigen Zeit herein geführt hat, sie sich selbst widerlegt, sich selber aufgehoben hat! So daß wir heute die merkwürdige Tatsache vor uns sehen, daß kaum auf irgendeinem Gebiete so wie auf dem des Darwinismus unter den Forschern über alle Punkte Uneinigkeit herrscht. Da gibt es heute noch solche - es sind die allerzurückgebliebensten -, welche den Menschen direkt auf die heute noch lebenden oder vielleicht nur ein wenig umgestalteten menschenähnlichen Affentiere zurückführen. Da gibt es insbesondere unter denjenigen, die die moderne Blutforschung verfolgen, die Verwandtschaft der einzelnen Blutsubstanzen - solche, welche diese ältere Form der Darwinistischen Theorie wiederaufgenommen haben, da gibt es solche, wie Klaatsch, welche sagen: Es ist ganz unmöglich nach den Tatsachen, welche sich ergeben haben, den Menschen auf irgendeine Tierform zurückzuführen, die heute besteht. Alle Nuancen sind vorhanden von denjenigen, die den Menschen noch auf den Affen, wie er heute ist, zurückführen wollen, bis zu solchen hinein, welche ihn nicht auf diesen zurückführen, aber auch nicht auf die Vorfahren dieser Affen oder anderer Säugetierwesen. Man muß hinaufgehen zu Tieren, von denen man keine Vorstellung haben kann und von denen auf der einen Seite der Mensch abstammt und von denen sich auf der anderen Seite abgespaltet haben die Säugetiere, so daß die Affen den Menschen ganz fernstehen. - Und das Eigentümliche ist, daß, wenn solche Forscher dann versuchen, die gegenwärtigen Formengestaltungen, die sich uns darbieten, zu benützen, um eine Vorstellung hervorzurufen von jenen wahren Vormenschen, sich alle physisch bestehenden Formen in allerlei nebuloses Zeug auflösen. Es kommt nichts dabei heraus. Warum nicht? Weil wir wiederum eine Stelle in der Biologie haben, wo die äußere physische Forschung der ehrlich erforschten Tatsachen dazu führt, daß man sich die Vorfahren der Menschen nicht physisch vorzustellen hat, da alles physische Vorstellen versagt. Man kommt zur geistigen Urform des Menschen, zu dem, was das Ergebnis war der früheren planetarischen Entwickelung, zu dem geistigen Urmenschen, von dem wir in der Geisteswissenschaft sprechen.

So sind vollgültige Zeugnisse gerade die erforschten Tatsachen des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts, und die Uneinigkeit der Forscher wird eigentlich dadurch nur verdeckt, daß die Studierenden nur bei einem Professor hören und nicht prüfen, was die anderen sagen. Wenn sie vergleichen würden, was der eine und der andere Gelehrte sagt, dann würden sie heute eine merkwürdige Entdeckung machen. Man würde dann zum Beispiel in Büchern des einen Naturforschers eine Stelle recht deutlich unterstrichen finden, wo er sagt: Wenn bei mir einer, der das Doktorexamen machen will, diese Behauptung aufstellen wollte, die da bei dem anderen gemacht wird, so würde ich ihn ohne weiteres durchfallen lassen. — Diese Behauptung ist aber keine andere als die, die irgendein Kollege an einer anderen Universität macht. Und diese Uneinigkeit ist das Hervorstechendste auf dem Gebiete der Biologie, während es auf dem Gebiet der Physik und Chemie die Resignation überhaupt gegenüber den Theorien ist. Noch interessanter ist es allerdings, wenn man in die Physiologie heraufkommt.

Wir sehen, wie diese Physiologie überall in höchst merkwürdige, phantastische Lehren einmündet. Da sehen wir, wie das rein Äußerliche der Physiologie heute auch bei den materialistisch denkenden Menschen, die es nicht sein wollen, es aber doch ihrer ganzen Denkrichtung nach sind, überall schon beeinflußt wird von allerlei Dingen, die unterhalb oder innerhalb des Physischen sind. Ich könnte da auf Hunderte von Dingen hinweisen, wie zum Beispiel in der neueren Zeit die sonderbaren Theorien, die unter dem Einflusse einer Wiener Schule, der sogenannten Freudschen Schule, aufgekommen sind: Theorien darüber, wie das unterbewußte Leben des Menschen, insofern es sich im Traumleben oder anderen Lebenserscheinungen äußert, in das Physiologische hineinspielt. Ich will auf solche Tatsachen, an die ich nur tippen kann, nur aus dem Grunde hinweisen, weil man daran sieht, daß sich tatsächlich überall die Nötigung zeigt, die auch sonst theoretisch hervortritt, einmünden zu lassen das empirische, das äußere, sinnliche Tatsachenmaterial in das Geistige. Daneben allerdings sehen wir, daß in dem Augenblicke, wo sich eine Art Gesamterfassung, eine Art Gesamtanschauung dessen, was der gesamtwissenschaftliche Eindruck der Gegenwart sein muß, geltend macht, eine gewisse Resignation eintritt.

Auch auf philosophischem Gebiete sehen wir diese Resignation. So ist Ihnen vielleicht bekannt, daß unter dem Einfluß von William James in Amerika, von F. C. Schiller in England, von anderen Forschern auf philosophischem Gebiete eine merkwürdige Theorie sich ausgebildet hat, die eigentlich in Wahrheit geboren ist aus jenem Hinstreben der Tatsachen zum Geist und sich doch nicht eingestehen will, daß man zum Geist hin muß. Es ist der sogenannte Pragmatismus, der da besagt, man müsse die verschiedenen Erscheinungen des Lebens so betrachten, daß wir Theorien über sie erfinden, als wenn sie eben zusammenfaßbar wären, aber alles, was wir aussinnen, ist nur da zur Ökonomie des Geistes, hat keinen innerlichen, konstitutiven, keinen wirklichen Wert. Das ist die letzte Schlacke der ausgebranntesten Geister der Gegenwart. Das ist der völlige Unglaube an den Geist, der nur an die schwachen Theorien appellieren will und diese erfunden sein läßt zum Zusammenhalten der Tatsachen, der aber nicht glaubt, daß der lebendige Geist erst die Gedanken in die Dinge gelegt hat, welche wir zuletzt in ihnen finden.

Am merkwürdigsten allerdings geht es in dieser Beziehung der Seelenwissenschaft selber. Da gibt es gewisse Seelenforscher, die können nicht so recht bis zu einem lebendigen Geist vordringen, in dem sich die Seele findet als auferstehend in den Dingen. Aber sie können doch wieder nicht ableugnen, daß, wenn man überhaupt eine Art von Harmonie zwischen der Seele und den Dingen herstellen will, man dann von der Seele etwas in die Dinge hineintragen muß. Das, was man in der Seele erlebt, muß etwas zu tun haben mit den Dingen. Und da ist denn ein kurioses Wort entstanden, das heute herumspukt in den deutschen Psychologien, ein Wort, das wirklich jedem philologischen Denken geradezu ins Gesicht schlägt, das Wort «einfühlen». Man kann sich kein stärkeres Verlegenheitswort denken gegenüber allem gründlichen Denken als das Wort «einfühlen». Als ob es darauf ankäme, daß wir etwas in die Dinge hineinfühlen können, wenn wir nicht den sachlichen, realen Zusammenhang zu dem, was wir in die Dinge hineinschauen, aus den Dingen selber finden können. Es ist die Geistverlassenheit der Seelenwissenschaft oder Psychologie, die sich mit solchen Verlegenheitsworten aushelfen will.

Und so könnten wir viele ähnliche Kunststückchen finden, die solche nicht ernsthaft zu nehmenden Psychologien in unserer Gegenwart zutage fördern. Andere Psychologien beschränken sich ganz darauf, die äußeren Werkzeuge des Seelenlebens zu beschreiben, das Gehirn oder sonstige Werkzeuge, und es ist schon so weit gekommen, daß Psychologen ernst genommen werden, welche experimentell nachweisen wollen, daß nichts verlorengeht an Kräften, an Energien, die wir durch Essen und Trinken und so weiter in uns aufnehmen, die wir dadurch in uns hineinpressen. Damit soll dann nachgewiesen werden, daß das Gesetz der Erhaltung der Kraft auch tonangebend sein muß für die Psychologie und daß da drinnen nicht etwa ein reines besonderes Seelenwesen arbeitet durch die Werkzeuge des Leibes. Solch ein Schluß ist nun wirklich aller Logik bar. Denn derjenige, der so schließt, der überhaupt in die Verlegenheit kommt, solch einen Gedanken aufzustellen, müßte auch zugeben, daß es vernünftig ist, sich vor ein Bankgebäude zu stellen, abzuzählen, wieviel Geld hineingetragen wird, nachzuzählen, wieviel Geld herausgetragen wird, abzuzählen, wieviel Geld in der Kasse bleibt, und dann daraus zu schließen, daß da drinnen in der Bank keine Menschen sind, die sich dort beschäftigen. Solche Schlüsse werden heute gemacht, und sie gelten als wissenschaftliche Schlüsse. Das sind die Theorien, die auf den Tatsachen der gegenwärtigen Forschung aufgebaut werden und die wie ein Nebel den wirklichen Bestand der Tatsachen verdunkeln.

Wie es um die Psychologie wirklich steht, können wir an einer höchst interessanten Erscheinung beobachten, an einem wirklich bedeutenden Menschen, der in den siebziger Jahren des vorigen Jahrhunderts eine Psychologie geschrieben hat, an Franz Brentano. Er hat den ersten Band einer mehrbändigen Psychologie geschrieben. Wer einzugehen vermag auf das, was in diesem ersten Band einer mehrbändigen Psychologie steht, wer einzugehen weiß von dem wirklichen Gesichtspunkt der psychologischen Tatsachen aus, der kann sich sagen: Nach dem, was da als Ansätze genommen ist bei Franz Brentano, müßte, wenn man überhaupt weiter könnte auf Grundlage dieser Ansätze, alles einmünden in die Geisteswissenschaft. Man kann gar nicht anders vorwärts. - Und wenn einer nicht in die Geisteswissenschaft einmünden wollte und solche, wenn auch schwachen Anfänge macht, um in vernünftiger Weise das Seelenleben zu begreifen, da müßte man voraussetzen, er könnte nicht weiter. Und hier haben wir die interessante Tatsache, daß dieser erste Band der mehrbändigen Psychologie in der Tat keine weiteren Bände erfahren hat. Es ist bei dem ersten Band geblieben, und in kleineren Werken hat Brentano Ansätze gemacht, dieses oder jenes zu begreifen; er hat aber nirgends den Zugang, das Tor zur Geisteswissenschaft gefunden und daher überhaupt nicht den weiteren Fortschritt der Psychologie für sich ermöglichen können. An einer solch signifikanten Tatsache können Sie sehen, wie auch das Negative, das uns in unserer Gegenwart entgegentritt, überall das Einmünden der Geister - die auf den Tatsachen fußen, die so wunderbar in den letzten Jahrzehnten hervorgetreten sind - in die Geisteswissenschaft fordert. Allerdings ist dieses Einmünden manchem heute noch zu schwer, für manchen sprechen andere Gründe dagegen. Wir wollen uns auf die Gründe aber jetzt nicht einlassen, sondern nur zeigen, daß überall, wo wir nach den wahren Kräften suchen, die im wirklichen Bestand der heutigen Wissenschaftlichkeit vorhanden sind, wo wir ehrlich und aufrichtig und umfassend und energisch vorgehen wollen, das Einmünden in die Geisteswissenschaft notwendig erfolgen muß.

Am weitesten entfernt ist allerdings die Historie, die Geschichte, wie sie heute getrieben wird, von diesem Einmünden in die Geisteswissenschaft. Da kommen diejenigen Geschichtsschreiber scheinbar schon am weitesten, welche nicht bloß in den Tatsachen der Geschichte ein zufälliges Spiel der aufeinanderfolgenden Triebe und Leidenschaften der Menschen und sonstiger Tatsachen des physischen Planes sehen, sondern welche von waltenden Gedanken sprechen. Als ob abstrakte Gedanken wirken könnten! Wenn man ihnen nicht einen Willen zuschreibt, sind sie keine Geistwesen, können sie nicht wirken. Daher ist es eine Sinnlosigkeit, von wesenlosen Ideen in der Geschichte zu sprechen. Erst dann, wenn man das lebendige Leben in die Geschichte einführt, wenn man das spirituelle Lebensprinzip durch die Seelen hindurchziehend denkt, wie es sich von Seele zu Seele immer erhöhter auslebt, wenn man Geschichte auffaßt, wie sie aufgefaßt ist in «Les grands Inities», in den «Großen Eingeweihten», hat man den Punkt erreicht, wo Geschichte auch einmündet in Geisteswissenschaft.

So können wir geradezu sagen: Einem unbefangenen Blick gegenüber zeigt sich, wie alle Wissenschaftlichkeit die geisteswissenschaftliche Betrachtung herausfordert. - Geister allerdings, die tiefer eingehen in das geistige Leben, so daß sie mit ihrer ganzen Seele auf den Erkenntniswegen wirklich wandeln wollen, die nicht bloß Theorien treiben, sondern deren Herzblut an der Erkenntnis hängt, oh, solche Geister zeigen auch in ihrem Leben, wie es überall in die Geisteswissenschaft hineingeführt wird. Da gab es einen Menschen, der ja der Außenwelt eine Reihe von Jahren als berühmter Dichter bekannt war, der durch Jahrzehnte hindurch auf seinem Krankenlager lag und in den letzten Jahren seines Lebens das, was er ersonnen, was sich ihm ergeben hat auf dem Erkenntnispfade, noch aufgeschrieben hat, um es der Nachwelt zu übergeben: ein Dichter, den die Philosophen natürlich nicht philosophisch ernst genommen haben. Ich meine Robert Hamerling. Aber Robert Hamerling - der vielleicht nur von Vincenz Knauer ernst genug genommen worden ist, der auch Vorträge über ihn gehalten hat —- war eben nicht ein theoretischer Philosoph, sondern ein solcher, der auf die Erkenntniswege mit seinem Herzblut sich begab, der, soweit es ihm zugänglich war, das chemische, das physikalische, das philosophische, das physiologische, das biologische, das historische Wissen unserer Zeit zusammennahm und es befruchtete mit der dichterischen Intuition. Robert Hamerling, der die Gedanken über die Welt befruchten konnte durch das, was ihm die dichterische Intuition gegeben, hat in seiner «Atomistik des Willens» alles das niedergelegt, was er auf seinem Erkenntnisweg gefunden hat, und dieser Erkenntnisweg war nicht ein solcher, wie ihn heute so viele gehen aus der bloßen Theorie, aus der Schulung, sondern aus dem unmittelbaren Leben heraus. Er hat in dieser «Atomistik des Willens» verschiedenes niedergelegt, das für denjenigen von Beachtung ist, der sich interessiert für das Einmünden der äußeren Wissenschaftlichkeit und der Intellektualität in die Spiritualität. Eine Stelle der «Atomistik des Willens» sei hier vorgelesen, um zu zeigen, was in diesem Buche von 1891 steht von seinen einsamen Gedanken, die er gesammelt hat für sich auf dem Pfade der Erkenntnis, wie er ihn eingeschlagen hat. «Es ließe sich», sagt Hamerling auf Seite 145 des zweiten Bandes seiner «Atomistik des Willens», «immerhin die Möglichkeit von lebenden Wesen denken, deren Leiblichkeit dünner wäre als die atmosphärische Luft. Für andere Weltenkörper wenigstens hat die Annahme solcher Wesen nichts gegen sich. Wesen von so geringer Dichte der Leiblichkeiten würden für uns als unsichtbar ganz dem entsprechen, was wir «Geister zu nennen pflegen. Desgleichen dem, was man als seelenhafte, nach dem Tode des Individuums noch fortlebende «Ätherleiber bezeichnet.» Und so geht es weiter. Hier haben Sie mitten in einem Werke, das aus dem Geistesleben der Gegenwart heraus geschrieben ist, auf den Ätherleib hingewiesen. Denken Sie nun, meine lieben Freunde, wenn überall Wahrheit und Aufrichtigkeit herrschen würde und gründliches Streben, sich bekannt zu machen mit dem, was als Gedanke in den Menschen wirklich lebt, wenn man überall ehrlich eingehen würde auf das Vorhandene, wenn - mit anderen Worten — die Menschen nicht so viele Bücher schreiben würden, bevor sie gelernt haben, was schon in anderen Büchern steht: dann gäbe es ein ganz anderes Arbeiten in unserer Zeit, dann gäbe es eine Kontinuität, dann würde man aber auch sagen müssen, daß in unseren letzten Jahrzehnten überall aus wahrer, ernster Wissenschaft spirituelles Leben hervorspringt, Hinblicke zu spirituellen Zielen und Perspektiven. Denn solche Fälle wie Robert Hamerling sind in großer Anzahl vorhanden.

So schließen sich die Spezialitäten der einzelnen Wissenschaften zusammen und fordern heraus, was heute einzig und allein ein umfassendes Weltbild geben kann, wie es zum Beispiel versucht worden ist in der «Geheimwissenschaft», die ich skizzenhaft schreiben durfte vor kurzer Zeit und in die hineingearbeitet sind, ohne daß man es bemerkt, die Ergebnisse der sämtlichen Wissenschaften von heute neben der spirituellen Forschung. Wenn wir das ins Auge fassen, dann müssen wir sagen: Eigentlich fehlt es gar nicht überall an geöffneten Toren zu der Spiritualität, nur beachtet man sie nicht. — Wer die Wissenschaft der Gegenwart kennt, findet überall, daß sie in ihren Tatsachen, nicht in ihren Theorien, die Spiritualität fordert. Wird man sich einmal emanzipieren können in bezug auf äußere Wissenschaft von allen Theorien, von atomistischen und Bewegungstheorien, von Energetik und allem, was in ähnlicher Einseitigkeit immer wieder mit ein paar hingepfahlten Begriffen die Welt umfassen will, wird man die große Summe der Tatsachen, welche die heutige Wissenschaft zutage fördert, allein sprechen lassen, dann wird man keinen Widerspruch mehr finden zwischen dem, was hier getrieben wird als Geisteswissenschaft, und den wahren wissenschaftlichen Ergebnissen der gegenwärtigen Forschung.

Auf einem solchen Wege kann nun Goethe ein großer Helfer sein, der in einer grandiosen Weise alle Bedingungen eines universellen Geistes erfüllte. Schon in äußerlicher Art; denn wer den Briefwechsel Goethes kennt, weiß, daß in der Zeit Goethes unzählige Naturforscher auf allen Gebieten über die wichtigsten Fragen mit Goethe korrespondiert haben. Überallhin gingen von Goethes Schreibstube, von seinen physikalischen und sonstigen Kabinetten aus die Fäden zu den einzelnen Verzweigungen der Wissenschaft. Mit Botanikern, Optikern, Zoologen, Anthropologen, Geologen, Mineralogen, Historikern, ja, ich müßte alle Wissenschaften aufzählen, mit allen hat Goethe korrespondiert. Und er hat neben dem, daß ihn die zurückgebliebenen Geister allerdings nicht anerkennen wollten, weil er mit seinen Forschungen weit über sie hinausging, solche Geister gefunden, die ihn im höchsten Grade ernst genommen und auf sein Urteil hingehört haben, wenn es sich darum handelte, diese oder jene auch Spezialfrage auszumachen. Das ist freilich nur eine Äußerlichkeit, aber wir können auch sehen, wie Goethe zusammenarbeitete in Gedanken und auch den Tatsachen nach mit den bedeutsamsten Philosophen seiner Zeit, wie Schelling, Hegel, und eine Anzahl von Philosophen befruchtet wurden durch Goethe, wie Goethesche Gedanken in ihren Werken in anderer oder gleicher Form wiederkehrten. Wir können endlich sehen, wie Goethe im Laufe seines Lebens ernsthaft sich befaßt hat mit Botanik, Zoologie, Osteologie speziell, mit Anthropologie in weiterem Sinne, wie er sich mit Optik und Physik im weiteren Sinne befaßte. Heute lassen ja einzelne Wissenschafter auf biologischem Gebiete Goethe ein wenig gelten. Man muß es dagegen den Physikern ganz ernsthaft glauben und vom Standpunkt der Farbenlehre verstehen, daß sie sich bei Goethes Farbenlehre nichts denken können, daß sie nichts davon verstehen, weil man diese Farbenlehre erst in späterer Zeit verstehen wird - falls man sich nicht früher schon durch Geisteswissenschaft damit bekannt gemacht hat -, vielleicht erst in der zweiten Hälfte des 20. oder ersten Hälfte des 21. Jahrhunderts. Die Physik von heute kann diese Farbenlehre Goethes nur als Unsinn anschauen. Das liegt aber nicht an der Farbenlehre, sondern an den heutigen Formen der Wissenschaft. Und wenn Sie lesen, was gemeint ist in meinem Buche über «Goethes Weltanschauung» wie auch in der Vorrede zu Goethes Naturwissenschaftlichen Werken, herausgegeben von Kürschner, dann können Sie sehen, daß darin eine Anschauung über die Farbenlehre steckt, die im tiefsten Sinne wissenschaftlich ist, der gegenüber alle physikalischen Theorien der Gegenwart dilettantisch sind.

So können wir sehen, wie Goethe auf allen Gebieten wirklich gearbeitet hat. Wir können sehen, wie überall sein Streben nach Erkenntnis der Naturgesetze befruchtet ist von dem, was Goethe als dichterische Kräfte in sich hatte. Bei ihm ist überhaupt nichts getrennt, alles spielt in seiner Seele ineinander. Da aber stört nicht eines das andere, und da ist uns Goethe ein lebendiger Beweis dafür, daß es in der Tat ein Unding, eine Absurdität ist, wenn man glauben sollte, daß der lebendige Betrieb meinetwillen eines intellektuellen Geisteszweiges die Intuition stören könnte. Wenn beide Triebe nur in ihrer Kraft und Ursprünglichkeit vorhanden sind, dann stört das eine das andere nicht. Wir können uns eine Vorstellung von dem lebendigen Zusammenarbeiten der menschlichen Seelenkräfte machen, wie sie sich in den einzelnen Wissenschaften und in der gesamten Persönlichkeit des Menschen äußern, wir können aus der Notwendigkeit des Lebens eine solche Vorstellung uns bilden, und wir haben noch die Hilfe, daß ein solcher moderner Geist vorhanden ist, in dem unmittelbar lebendig war dieses Zusammenwirken der einzelnen Seelenkräfte der gesamten Persönlichkeit. Daher ist Goethe eine so vorbildliche Persönlichkeit, die man anschauen muß, um dieses lebendige Zusammenwirken der Seelenkräfte studieren zu können. Und da er ein Mensch ist, an dem man tatsächlich verfolgen kann, wie er von Jahr zu Jahr steigt in bezug auf die Vertiefung des eigenen Seelenlebens, des Weltverständnisses, haben wir in ihm ein Beispiel dafür, wie der Mensch streben muß, um zu einer Vertiefung seines Seelenlebens zu gelangen. Nicht etwa bloß die Betrachtung Goethes, nicht das Nachsprechen seiner Sätze, nicht das Hinnehmen seiner Werke, sondern das Grandiose, das von seiner ganzen Erscheinung ausgeht, vorbildlich für unsere Gegenwart zu betrachten, das ist es, was uns vielleicht ganz besonders an einem Tage vor die Seele treten darf, der wie der heutige als Kalendertag im engeren Sinne an Goethes Leben erinnert. Und insbesondere der heutige wissenschaftliche Geist könnte viel von Goethe lernen. Weit ist ja dieser wissenschaftliche Geist in bezug auf die Erfassung des geistigen Lebens nicht gediehen, aber gerade von dieser Seite her wird und muß Goethe eine Auferstehung feiern, wird und muß Goethe allmählich mehr und mehr begriffen werden, denn vieles von dem, was man nennen kann eine gesunde Durchleuchtung unseres Fortschrittes in die geistigen Welten, unserer Geisteswissenschaft überhaupt, kann ausgehen von einer Betrachtung Goethes, weil bei Goethe alles gesund ist. Goethe ist in allen Dingen zuverlässig, und wo er sich widerspricht, sind es nicht logische Widersprüche, die sich ergeben, sondern weil das Leben selbst sich widerspricht und sich widersprechen muß, damit es lebendig ist.

Das war ein Gedanke, den ich gerne heute am Geburtstag Goethes in Ihnen noch anregen wollte, um zu zeigen, wie notwendig es ist, daß wir uns noch in ganz anderer Art in Dinge vertiefen, die offen vor uns liegen. Goethe kann uns unendlich vieles geben. Er wird uns am meisten geben, wenn wir vieles von dem vergessen, was in unzähligen Werken über Goethe geschrieben worden ist, denn das ist eher dazu geeignet, uns einen Schleier über den wirklichen Goethe zu breiten, als ihn kennenzulernen. Aber Goethe hat eine geheime Anziehungskraft, Goethe hat etwas, was durch sich selbst wirkt, und wenn Sie sich auf Goethe einlassen, dann werden Sie schon sehen, daß Sie einen Geburtstag Goethes in sich selber erleben können, daß Sie etwas von dem erleben, was ewig jung und frisch in Goethe ist, von dem man sagen kann: Goethe kann in einer von Geisteswissenschaft durchdrungenen Seele wieder erstehen. Unsere materialistische Zeit hat, wenn sie noch so oft den Namen Goethe nennt, noch so viele von Goethes Werken anführt, doch herzlich wenig Verständnis für ihn.

Es gab Zeiten, wo man mit der ganzen Seele wirklich von Goethe fasziniert werden konnte, selbst wenn ernsthaft über Goethe gesprochen wurde - nicht in unserem Sinn literarisch-historisch, was ja nicht ernsthaft ist, wenn ernsthaft gesprochen wurde - da fanden sich die Menschen, die durch ein solches Sprechen hingerissen wurden durch den innersten, spirituellen Nerv, der in Goethe immer liegt. Und da darf stets wieder daran erinnert werden, wie Rosenkranz, der Hegelianer, in einer Zeit der dreißiger, vierziger Jahre des vorigen Jahrhunderts, wie der alte Karl Rosenkranz, der auf der Höhe der Bildung seiner Zeit stand, das Wagnis unternahm, an der Universität in Königsberg Vorträge über Goethe anzukündigen. Er wollte einmal frank und frei aussprechen, was ein Philosoph über Goethe zu sagen hat. Da hat er sich denn diese Vorträge zurecht gelegt und da ging er mit dem Gedanken aus seiner Gelehrtenstube heraus: Nun, ein paar Zuhörer wirst du vielleicht doch haben. - Aber dieser Gedanke wollte ihm fast schwinden, als er hinaustrat und ein so furchtbares Schneegestöber draußen war, daß man denken konnte, es wagt sich niemand auf die Straße und demgemäß niemand auch in die Hörsäle zu einem Kolleg, das man ja nicht zum Brotstudium brauchte. Da ging er doch hin, und siehe da, die Bedingungen, unter denen er vorzutragen hatte, waren die denkbar ungünstigsten. Es war ein Raum, der nicht geheizt werden konnte, der keinen ordentlichen Fußboden hatte und an dessen Wänden überall das Wasser in Strömen herunterrann. Der Name Goethe hatte aber gezogen, und es war schon eine stattliche Anzahl von Menschen am ersten Vortragsabend, und es kamen immer mehr und mehr. Und trotzdem sich die Verhältnisse immer ungünstiger gestalteten, immer unbehaglicher wurden in diesem Saal, so waren zuletzt doch so viele bei Karl Rosenkranz’ Vorlesungen, daß der Saal sie fast nicht fassen konnte.

Goethe gerade ist zu denjenigen Geistern zu zählen, die uns anthroposophisch am meisten anregen können, und wir werden, wenn wir uns sagen, daß in dem fleischlichen Leibe des Goethe ein großer Geist war, den wir allerdings erst studieren müssen, in einer gesünderen Weise zu einer anthroposophischen Betrachtung kommen, als wenn wir uns einen fleischlichen Leib vorführen lassen würden, in dem ein großer Geist ist, den wir auf Autorität hin anerkennen sollen. Es gibt wahrhaftig gesunde Wege in die Anthroposophie hinein. Man braucht sie nur zu gehen, man braucht nur die Mühe nicht zu scheuen. Daher schrecke ich auch niemals davor zurück, wenn auch viele Zuhörer bei solch einem Vortragszyklus sind, unter Umständen in recht unbequemer Weise in diese oder jene Seitenwege der geistigen Betrachtung hineinzuleuchten, dieses oder jenes Gewagte zu sagen, dieses oder jenes schwer Verständliche zu sagen. Niemals werde ich davor zurückschrecken, weil ich weiß, daß nur auf diesem Wege ein gesunder Fortschritt für die Anthroposophie, ein wirkliches Einleben der Geisteswissenschaft in das moderne Kulturleben möglich ist. Und mir scheint, daß man in die höchsten geistigen Regionen hinaufsteigen kann und dabei das Herz nicht zu erkälten braucht. Mir scheint, daß all diejenigen, die hier versammelt sind, doch etwas davon verspüren können, daß Anthroposophie hier mit den Mitteln des modernsten Geisteslebens interpretiert wird und daß es eine sehr große Verirrung ist, wenn irgendwo, auch auf anthroposophischem Gebiet, das sonderbare Urteil figuriert, als ob hier etwas Mittelalterliches, nicht der modernen Wissenschaft Entsprechendes den Leuten aufgewärmt würde. Weil das gesagt wird von manchem, auch auf anthroposophischem Gebiete, muß darauf aufmerksam gemacht werden: Derjenige, der mit Verständnis folgen kann, wird wissen, daß nichts Mittelalterliches, daß objektiv Wissenschaftliches im Bunde mit wahrhaftem modernem Geistesstreben angestrebt wird. Wie weit es erreicht wird, das zu beurteilen steht mir nicht zu. Daß aber nichts Mittelalterliches, nichts irgendwie mit den Traditionen bloß Zusammenhängendes, sondern etwas Objektives, der modernen Wissenschaft Ebenbürtiges angestrebt wird, das sollte man wenigstens einsehen. Und daß unsere Herzen ergriffen werden können von den Lebensbedingungen, die von dieser anthroposophischen Betrachtung ausgehen, das darf auch als etwas Sicheres erscheinen. Das scheint mir das Wichtigste zu sein, was wir aus einer solchen Betrachtung für unsere Herzen mitnehmen und in die Welt hinaustragen. Was wir in der Breite der Begriffe, der Worte erfaßt haben, das zieht sich zusammen in unseren Herzen, das leben wir in unseren Gefühlen und Empfindungen, in unserem Mitleid, das leben wir in unseren Taten aus — und leben dann die Anthroposophie. Und wie die Flüsse nur hinausströmen können über die Lande, wenn sie von den Quellen ihr Wasser beziehen, so kann das Leben der Anthroposophie nur hinausströmen in die Welt, wenn es seine Kräfte bezieht aus den Weisheitsquellen, die uns heute eröffnet werden durch jene spirituellen Mächte, die wir nennen die Meister der Weisheit und des Zusammenklangs der Empfindungen. Und wir haben Geisteswissenschaft im wahren Sinne des Wortes erfaßt, wenn sie in den Formen des neuzeitlichen Geisteslebens zu uns spricht, wenn sie aber zugleich unsere Herzen, unsere Seelen nicht kalt läßt, sondern wärmt, so daß diese Wärme sich überall in der Welt auch den anderen mitteilen kann. So viel Sie von dem, was hier gesagt wird, hinaustragen in die Welt, hinaustragen nicht nur durch Gedanken, sondern durch Ihre Gefühle und Willensimpulse und Taten, so viel haben diese Vorträge genützt. Und das ist das Bestreben dieser Vorträge.

Mit diesem Wunsche, meine lieben Freunde, begrüße ich Sie im Herzen immer, wenn Sie hierher kommen, mit diesen Wünschen grüße ich Sie am heutigen Tage, wo wir diesen Vortragszyklus abschließen und wo ich Ihnen sage: Seien wir im spirituellen und geistigen Sinn beieinander, wenn wir auch im Raum der eine da, der andere dort leben müssen. Und nehmen wir von der Zeit, wo wir auch enger im Raum nebeneinander sein können, das als die schönste gegenseitige Begrüßung, als das schönste gegenseitige Abschiedswort mit, daß wir im Geiste beisammen sind, auch wenn wir uns räumlich zerstreut haben. In diesem Sinne sage ich Ihnen heute, da wir am Geburtstag Goethes am Ende unseres Zyklus stehen, den Gruß am Ende dieser Vortragsreihe. Denken wir an das, was uns vereint hat, recht oft und lassen wir es dadurch auch für das persönliche Band, das sich von dem einen zum andern in Liebe immer schlingen kann, fruchtbar sein. Seien wir in diesem Sinn beieinander, auch wenn wir uns getrennt haben, und lassen wir uns durch diesen Sinn immer wieder aufs neue zusammenführen, um uns zu den Höhen des Geistes, des übersinnlichen Lebens zu erheben.

Eleventh Lecture

On Goethe's birthday

The Faust poem accompanied Goethe from his youth—one may well say in the truest sense of the word—until his death. For Goethe sealed the second part of Faust and left it behind as his literary testament. And the completion of individual important sections of this Faust, the second part, truly belongs to the last years of this universal mind. Anyone who has the opportunity to follow Goethe a little in his intellectual development, as expressed in this life poem, will be able to experience many highly interesting things, particularly about the way in which Goethe, when he returned again and again to this poem, his life poem, always came up with different ideas about how it should proceed. There is an interesting record of the ending of Goethe's Faust as it should have been according to Goethe's views at the time, which we can place in the late 1880s or early 1890s. There, alongside a few notes – “disposition” would not be the right word for them – about the first and second parts, we find a short sentence, a hint about the ending. And this hint contains Goethe's words, written in pencil: “Epilogue in chaos on the way to hell.” From this you will see that Goethe once thought of not giving his Faust the kind of ascension that now stands in the poem he completed in his old age, but that, in the spirit of the journey hinted at in the prologue—from heaven through the world to hell—he wanted to conclude “Faust” with an “epilogue in chaos on the way to hell.” These were thoughts that lived in Goethe's soul at the time, and they led to the conclusion that knowledge, when it crosses certain boundaries, can only lead to chaos. And in a certain sense, we can connect the mood from which these words emerged, which I have quoted to you as Goethe's words, with what was said yesterday about our trials of the soul, when the soul, on the one hand, sinks into nothingness and, on the other hand, into the dense inner essence of man and cannot yet find union. Goethe is a personality who indeed had to conquer everything step by step, who had to go through everything personally. That is why everything Goethe created seems so sincere and honest to us, though sometimes so great that we cannot immediately follow it, because we cannot always immediately find our way into the individual shaping of the personality that was present in Goethe at this or that moment of his life. We can therefore note a truly great progress in Goethe from the time when he wanted to end his Faust with an “Epilogue in Chaos on the Way to Hell” to the time when he concluded, entirely in keeping with the lapidary sentence: “Whoever strives with effort, we can redeem.” For when Goethe wrote down the now universally known conclusion of his Faust, he was filled with the premonition we spoke of yesterday, but also with the energy that gives us the certainty that, even if we have to go through all the trials of the soul, we will finally come to the union that was described yesterday. Let this be said, my dear friends, to point out a little of what is the most striking feature of Goethe's life.

Those people who love a straightforward life, who shy away from finding themselves in contradictions, which nevertheless signify the vitality of a progressive life, will take offense at the fact that, if one seriously investigates, one indeed finds many contradictions in Goethe's life, that Goethe judged many things differently in his old age than in his youth. But this stems only from the fact that Goethe had to fight for every truth in life. And it is precisely in Goethe's personality that we see how this life, directly on the physical plane, challenges our inner experiences, how necessary this life is in its successive events to make us complete human beings. For what strikes us so magnificently in Goethe when we look back over his entire life and engage with its successive stages is the universality of his spirit, the all-encompassing, multifaceted nature of this spirit. And it is extremely important to study Goethe from this particular perspective in his time, and also to measure what he was through the universality of his spirit against our own time, and then to ask: What can Goethe be for our time through the universality of his spirit?

It is good, then, if we consider a little the inner constitution of our time, our present, our spiritual culture. For anthroposophists, it is of particular importance to take a look at the spirit of our age. It is often said that our time is the age of specialization, the age in which strict science must reign. And often the words of the great physicist Helmholtz are repeated: that in our time there can be no spirit that encompasses the individual branches of human knowledge as they exist today. It has become a catchphrase that there can be no Doctor Universalis of our time, that we must be content with an overview of this or that specialty. But if we consider that life is a unified whole, that everything in life is interconnected, and that life does not conform to our ability to comprehend with our minds what belongs to the entire spiritual organism of our time, then we must say: It would actually be a terrible thing for our age if it were not possible to gain, at least in some way, the spirit that reigns in all specialization. And it will be easiest to gain this spirit if we try to advance through those approaches which spiritual science can open up. Spiritual science must be universal; it must, in a certain sense, survey the specialties of the individual sciences and the individual areas of the whole of cultural life at a glance. And today we want to take a look, at least from one angle, at how our present spiritual life appears in the light of spiritual science. We will not speak, because there is not enough time, about those scientific fields that remain more or less the same for all times, at least in their meaning and spirit, even though they have undergone such tremendous enrichment in our time. We will refrain from discussing the field of mathematics, although we could point out that 19th-century mathematics, through its serious considerations in certain branches, has virtually conquered the supersensible realm. But we would like to point out that in the most diverse branches of modern science, tremendous discoveries have been made in the course of the last few decades which, when viewed in the right light, show us everywhere that the spiritual scientific interpretation is exactly correct, while all the theories that have been taught up to our time are completely at odds with the facts which have been gathered with such diligence and energy over the last few decades. We can already see from the example of physics and chemistry how remarkable the course of development has been in recent decades.

When we were young—in the 1870s, 1880s, or earlier—there were so-called atomistic theories in physics and chemistry that reduced all phenomena to certain forms of vibration, whether of the ether or of some other material substance. And one might say: At that time, it was fashionable to reduce everything we encounter in the world to movements. Then, towards the end of the 19th century, facts gradually came to light which showed that the theory of motion, the atomistic theory, no longer held water, and it was in a certain sense a significant act, but in the most limited sense, when Ostwald, who was known primarily as a chemist and natural scientist, proposed the so-called energetics, the theory of energy, at the meeting in Lübeck in place of the atomistic theory. In a certain sense, this was a step forward. But what has subsequently become apparent in the fields of physics and chemistry has ultimately led to a certain skepticism, a certain disbelief in all theory. And only backward minds still think today of attributing external physical facts such as light phenomena or other physical or chemical facts to the movements of tiny particles or to mere manifestations of energy. This was particularly influenced by what has become known in recent years about the substances that led to the theory of radium, and the remarkable fact has already occurred that great physicists such as Thomson and others have been forced by certain circumstances that have gradually come to light to abandon all theory, especially the ether theory with its elaborate forms of vibration, which had once been pursued with such seriousness and calculated with such diligence using differentials and integrals. This theory of motion has thus been discarded by the great physicists, who have in a sense returned to a kind of vortex theory that had already emerged under Cartesius, based, one might say, on ancient occult traditions. But even these theories were abandoned, and a certain skepticism toward all theorizing has arisen, especially in the fields of physics and chemistry, after it was seen that matter, so to speak, crumbled in our hands under modern physical experiments. The fact is that, in contrast to today's physics as it has developed up to the present day, the atomistic theories of motion and energy are no longer tenable. Everything that could still have been defended five, six, or a few years ago, on which so many hopes were pinned when we were young, when even gravity was attributed to motion, has crumbled into nothing in recent years for those who have come to know the facts. But of course, one always hears the strangest things from those who lag behind. I would like to point out something interesting to you, since I want to discuss today what characterizes our time and Goethe.

A little book has been published which also takes the view that there is no gravity, that is, that matter and the bodies of the universe do not attract each other. It has always been difficult for science to explain this so-called attraction, because one asks oneself: How can the sun attract the earth if it does not extend anything into space? Then, in the last few days, this book appeared, which traces attraction back to impact forces, so that, for example, if we have a body, a celestial body or even just molecules, they are constantly being impacted from all sides by other celestial bodies and molecules. Why is it that these bodies impact each other from all sides? For of course they also collide internally, one goes this way, the other that way, and so on. The most important thing now would be to consider the number of collisions that occur externally and internally, and then the collisions that occur in between, and to note that there is a difference. The collisions that occur in between are fewer and exert less force than the external ones. The result is that the external impacts cause the two—be they molecules or celestial bodies—to be drawn together. Thus, what we otherwise refer to as gravitational force is traced back to the impacts of matter. It is cute when one finds something like a new idea today, but for those who investigate things, it is just cute. For the simple reason, for example, that when I was a very young boy, this theory was expounded with all its mathematical intricacies by a certain Heinrich Schramm in a book that is now out of print: “The general movement of matter as the fundamental cause of all natural phenomena.” There it is done much more thoroughly. Such things occur again and again among those who do not consider the development of spiritual life. One can experience the most remarkable things, how the same errors are made again and again from a one-sided point of view. I would like to emphasize how the achievements of physics and chemistry in recent years have provided clear evidence that what we call matter is only a human concept and disintegrates under experimentation, and that physics and chemistry, beyond all movement and all energy, point directly to the point where matter merges with the spirit that underlies it. A spiritual foundation is already challenging the factual world of physics and chemistry today.

Geology and paleontology are in a very similar situation. Until the 1860s and 1870s, there were certain comprehensive theories that took into account large complexes of forces. Today, we see skepticism everywhere, and even our best geologists and paleontologists limit themselves to merely recording the facts because they do not dare to summarize them through thought. It takes a certain amount of courage to develop ideas that summarize the corresponding series of facts. But today people are afraid to take the step that geology and paleontology also demand: from the material to the spiritual, the step that would also lead beyond the Kant-Laplace theory. People do not dare to acknowledge that what is a dreamt-up nebula of worlds ultimately flows into the spiritual, into the totality of hierarchies, of which only an outer garment is all that could be called the external physical or, for my sake, astrophysical theory.

Things are different when we move on to those sciences that are closer to life or, more specifically, to the soul. First, we find biology. You know what enormous hopes were pinned on the progress of biology, the study of life, when Darwin's great work, On the Origin of Species, appeared. You may also know that in the 1860s, Ernst Haeckel, with rare boldness, extended to humans at the naturalists' conference in Stettin in 1863 what Darwin had apparently limited to the animal kingdom until then. And then we see a strange development in relation to this science of life, or biology. We see the more cautious minds, who limit themselves more to recording the facts, but also others who rush forward and construct bold theories based on what emerges from investigations into the relationship between the forms of individual living beings. Haeckel, in particular, boldly constructed family trees showing how the most complex organisms arose from simple ones through ever new and new branches.

But alongside these, one might say, more striking directions, there is a current of research that is also important to consider, which I would like to characterize by the name of the anatomist Carl Gegenbaur. Gegenbaur was essentially of the opinion that one should not initially ask how all this relates, this relationship between individual living beings. But he regarded Darwin's theory in such a way that, if one takes it as a regulative principle of research, one then investigates certain facts in the external world of forms or living beings. Let's say that the attitude of such a researcher could be expressed in the following words: I don't want to say right away that, for my part, higher animals are descended from birds or fish, but I want to take as my starting point the principle that a relationship exists, and I want to examine the gills and fins to see how finer and finer relationships emerge. — And indeed, by viewing Darwinian work as a kind of leitmotif of exploration, important and increasingly important research findings have emerged. However, these findings have also emerged where this research—inspired by the Darwinian impulse—sought to investigate the origin of humans and to examine all the evidence provided by paleontology and geology.

Wherever one has been more cautious, one has proceeded as follows: one wants to seek out relationships, one wants to take the Darwinian theory as a guiding principle. And so the strange thing has happened that Darwinian theory as such a guiding principle has proved to be extremely fruitful in recent years, and that through the facts to which it has led us up to the present day, it has refuted itself, it has abolished itself! So today we are faced with the remarkable fact that in hardly any other field is there such disagreement among researchers on all points as in Darwinism. There are still those today—the most backward among us—who trace humans directly back to human-like apes that are still alive today or perhaps only slightly transformed. There are, especially among those who follow modern blood research, the relationship of individual blood substances—those who have taken up this older form of Darwinist theory again—there are those, like Klaatsch, who say: It is completely impossible, according to the facts that have come to light, to trace humans back to any animal form that exists today. All nuances are present, from those who still want to trace humans back to apes as they are today, to those who do not trace them back to apes, but also not to the ancestors of these apes or other mammals. One must go back to animals of which one cannot have any conception, from which, on the one hand, humans are descended and from which, on the other hand, mammals have split off, so that apes are completely unrelated to humans. And the peculiar thing is that when such researchers then try to use the present forms that present themselves to us to evoke an idea of those true pre-humans, all physically existing forms dissolve into all kinds of nebulous stuff. Nothing comes of it. Why not? Because we again have a point in biology where external physical research of honestly investigated facts leads to the conclusion that one cannot imagine the ancestors of humans physically, since all physical imagination fails. One arrives at the spiritual archetype of humans, at what was the result of earlier planetary development, at the spiritual archetype of humans of which we speak in spiritual science.

Thus, the researched facts of the 19th and 20th centuries are fully valid evidence, and the disagreement among researchers is actually only concealed by the fact that students listen to only one professor and do not examine what others say. If they were to compare what one scholar says with what another says, they would make a remarkable discovery today. For example, in the books of one natural scientist, one would find a passage quite clearly underlined where he says: If one of my students who wants to take the doctoral examination were to make the assertion made by the other, I would fail him without hesitation. — But this assertion is none other than that made by a colleague at another university. And this disagreement is the most striking feature in the field of biology, while in the fields of physics and chemistry it is resignation towards theories in general. It is even more interesting, however, when one comes to physiology.

We see how this physiology leads everywhere to highly strange, fantastic teachings. We see how the purely external aspects of physiology today, even among materialistic-minded people who do not want to be so but are nevertheless so in their entire way of thinking, are already influenced everywhere by all kinds of things that are below or within the physical realm. I could point to hundreds of examples, such as the strange theories that have arisen in recent times under the influence of a Viennese school, the so-called Freudian school: theories about how the subconscious life of human beings, insofar as it expresses itself in dream life or other phenomena of life, plays into physiology. I want to point out such facts, which I can only hint at, for the sole reason that they show that everywhere there is a compulsion, which also emerges theoretically, to allow empirical, external, sensory factual material to flow into the spiritual. At the same time, however, we see that at the moment when a kind of overall grasp, a kind of overall view of what the overall scientific impression of the present must be, asserts itself, a certain resignation sets in.

We also see this resignation in the field of philosophy. You may be aware that under the influence of William James in America, F. C. Schiller in England, and other researchers in the field of philosophy, a curious theory has developed which is actually born out of the striving of facts toward the spirit, yet refuses to admit that one must strive toward the spirit. It is the so-called pragmatism, which says that we must view the various phenomena of life in such a way that we invent theories about them as if they could be summarized, but everything we devise is only there for the economy of the mind and has no inner, constitutive, or real value. This is the last dregs of the most burnt-out minds of the present day. This is complete disbelief in the spirit, which only wants to appeal to weak theories and allows them to be invented in order to hold the facts together, but which does not believe that the living spirit first placed the thoughts in the things that we ultimately find in them.

The most remarkable thing in this regard, however, is the science of the soul itself. There are certain psychologists who cannot quite penetrate to a living spirit in which the soul finds itself resurrected in things. But they cannot deny that if one wants to establish any kind of harmony between the soul and things, one must then carry something from the soul into things. What one experiences in the soul must have something to do with things. And so a curious word has come into being, which is now haunting German psychology, a word that really strikes every philological mind, the word “empathize.” One cannot think of a more embarrassing word for all thorough thinking than the word “empathize.” As if it mattered that we can empathize with things when we cannot find the factual, real connection to what we see in things from the things themselves. It is the mindlessness of soul science or psychology that wants to help itself with such words of embarrassment.

And so we could find many similar tricks that such psychologies, which cannot be taken seriously, bring to light in our present day. Other psychologies limit themselves entirely to describing the external tools of the soul life, the brain or other tools, and it has even come to the point where psychologists are taken seriously who want to prove experimentally that nothing is lost of the forces, the energies that we take into ourselves through eating and drinking and so on, that we press into ourselves through these means. This is supposed to prove that the law of conservation of energy must also apply to psychology and that there is not some pure, special soul working inside us through the tools of the body. Such a conclusion is completely illogical. For anyone who comes to such a conclusion, who is even tempted to entertain such a thought, would also have to admit that it is reasonable to stand in front of a bank building, count how much money is carried in, count how much money is carried out, count how much money remains in the cash register, and then conclude that there are no people working inside the bank. Such conclusions are made today, and they are considered scientific conclusions. These are the theories that are built on the facts of current research and that obscure the real substance of the facts like a fog.

We can observe the true state of psychology in a highly interesting phenomenon, in a truly significant person who wrote a psychology in the 1870s, Franz Brentano. He wrote the first volume of a multi-volume work on psychology. Anyone who is able to delve into what is written in this first volume of a multi-volume work on psychology, anyone who knows how to approach it from the real point of view of psychological facts, can say to themselves: According to the approaches taken by Franz Brentano, if it were possible to continue on the basis of these approaches, everything would have to lead to spiritual science. There is no other way forward. And if someone did not want to lead into spiritual science and made such, albeit weak, beginnings in order to understand the life of the soul in a reasonable way, one would have to assume that they could not go any further. And here we have the interesting fact that this first volume of the multi-volume work on psychology did not in fact have any further volumes. It remained with the first volume, and in smaller works Brentano made attempts to understand this or that; but he never found the entrance, the gateway to spiritual science, and therefore could not enable the further progress of psychology. From such a significant fact, you can see how even the negative aspects we encounter in our present day demand that the minds—which are based on the facts that have emerged so wonderfully in recent decades—converge in spiritual science. However, this convergence is still too difficult for some today, and for others there are other reasons against it. However, we do not want to go into the reasons now, but only show that wherever we search for the true forces that exist in the real substance of today's science, wherever we want to proceed honestly, sincerely, comprehensively, and energetically, the confluence with spiritual science must necessarily take place.

However, history as it is practiced today is furthest removed from this convergence with spiritual science. Those historians who seem to have come furthest are those who do not see in the facts of history merely a random play of successive human impulses and passions and other facts of the physical plane, but who speak of ruling ideas. As if abstract thoughts could have an effect! If one does not attribute a will to them, they are not spiritual beings and cannot have an effect. It is therefore pointless to speak of non-essential ideas in history. Only when one introduces living life into history, when one thinks of the spiritual principle of life passing through the souls, living itself out in ever higher forms from soul to soul, when one understands history as it is understood in “Les grands Inities” (The Great Initiates), has one reached the point where history also flows into spiritual science.

So we can say quite simply: to an unbiased eye, it is clear how all scientific inquiry challenges spiritual science. However, spirits who delve deeper into spiritual life, who truly want to walk the paths of knowledge with their whole soul, who do not merely pursue theories but whose heart and soul are devoted to knowledge—oh, such spirits also show in their lives how everything leads to spiritual science. There was a man who was known to the outside world for a number of years as a famous poet, who lay on his sickbed for decades and, in the last years of his life, wrote down what he had conceived, what had come to him on the path of knowledge, in order to pass it on to posterity: a poet whom philosophers, of course, did not take seriously as a philosopher. I am referring to Robert Hamerling. But Robert Hamerling—who was perhaps only taken seriously enough by Vincenz Knauer, who also gave lectures about him—was not a theoretical philosopher, but rather someone who devoted himself heart and soul to the paths of knowledge, who, as far as he was able, took the chemical, physical, philosophical, physiological, and biological and historical knowledge of our time and enriched it with poetic intuition. Robert Hamerling, who was able to enrich our thinking about the world through his poetic intuition, recorded everything he discovered on his path to knowledge in his “Atomistik des Willens” (Atomism of the Will), and this path to knowledge was not one that so many today follow from mere theory and academic training, but one that arose directly from life itself. In this “Atomistik des Willens,” he recorded various things that are of interest to those who are interested in the convergence of external scientificity and intellectuality with spirituality. Let us read a passage from “Atomistik des Willens” to show what this book from 1891 contains of his solitary thoughts, which he gathered for himself on the path of knowledge he had embarked upon. “It would be possible,” says Hamerling on page 145 of the second volume of his ‘Atomistik des Willens,’ ”to imagine living beings whose physical bodies are thinner than atmospheric air. For other world bodies, at least, there is nothing to prevent the assumption of such beings. Beings of such low physical density would correspond to what we call “spirits” as invisible to us. Similarly, what is referred to as “etheric bodies” that continue to live after the death of the individual.” And so it goes on. Here, in the middle of a work written from the spiritual life of the present, you have been referred to the etheric body. Now think, my dear friends, if truth and sincerity prevailed everywhere, and if there were a thorough striving to become acquainted with what really lives as thought in human beings, if everywhere people would honestly engage with what already exists, if—in other words—people would not write so many books before they have learned what is already in other books: then there would be a completely different way of working in our time, then there would be continuity, but then one would also have to say that in our last decades, spiritual life has sprung forth everywhere from true, serious science, with insights into spiritual goals and perspectives. For there are many cases like that of Robert Hamerling.

Thus, the specialties of the individual sciences come together and challenge what today can only be provided by a comprehensive worldview, as has been attempted, for example, in the “Secret Science,” which I was allowed to sketch out recently and into which the results of all of today's sciences, alongside spiritual research, have been incorporated without anyone noticing. When we consider this, we must say that there is not really a lack of open doors to spirituality everywhere; it is just that people do not notice them. Anyone familiar with contemporary science will find that it demands spirituality in its facts, not in its theories. Once we are able to emancipate ourselves from all theories in external science, from atomistic and motion theories, from energetics and everything else that, in similar one-sidedness, repeatedly attempts to encompass the world with a few fixed concepts, we will let the great sum of facts that modern science brings to light speak for itself, and then we will no longer find any contradiction between what is being pursued here as spiritual science and the true scientific results of current research.

Goethe, who fulfilled all the conditions of a universal spirit in a magnificent way, can now be a great help in this endeavor. Already in an external way; for anyone familiar with Goethe's correspondence knows that in Goethe's time countless natural scientists in all fields corresponded with him on the most important questions. From Goethe's study, from his physics and other cabinets, threads led everywhere to the individual branches of science. Goethe corresponded with botanists, opticians, zoologists, anthropologists, geologists, mineralogists, historians—indeed, I would have to list all the sciences. And besides the fact that the backward minds did not want to acknowledge him because his research went far beyond them, he found minds that took him seriously in the highest degree and listened to his judgment when it came to determining this or that special question. This is, of course, only superficial, but we can also see how Goethe collaborated in thought and in fact with the most important philosophers of his time, such as Schelling and Hegel, and how a number of philosophers were influenced by Goethe, how Goethe's ideas recurred in their works in different or similar forms. Finally, we can see how Goethe seriously engaged with botany, zoology, osteology in particular, and anthropology in a broader sense throughout his life, and how he dealt with optics and physics in a broader sense. Today, individual scientists in the field of biology give Goethe some credit. On the other hand, we must take physicists at their word and understand from the standpoint of color theory that they cannot make sense of Goethe's color theory, that they do not understand it, because this color theory will only be understood at a later time—if one has not already become acquainted with it through spiritual science—perhaps only in the second half of the 20th century or the first half of the 21st century. Today's physics can only regard Goethe's theory of colors as nonsense. But this is not due to the theory of colors itself, but to the current forms of science. And if you read what is meant in my book on “Goethe's World View” as well as in the preface to Goethe's Scientific Works, published by Kürschner, you will see that it contains a view of color theory that is scientific in the deepest sense, compared to which all contemporary physical theories are amateurish.

Thus we can see how Goethe really worked in all fields. We can see how his striving for knowledge of the laws of nature is everywhere enriched by what Goethe had within himself as poetic powers. With him, nothing is separate; everything plays together in his soul. But one does not interfere with the other, and Goethe is living proof that it is indeed absurd to believe that the lively activity of an intellectual branch of the mind could interfere with intuition. If both drives exist only in their power and originality, then one does not interfere with the other. We can form an idea of the lively cooperation of the human soul forces as they express themselves in the individual sciences and in the entire personality of man; we can form such an idea from the necessity of life, and we have the additional help of the existence of such a modern spirit in which this cooperation of the individual soul forces of the entire personality was immediately alive. This is why Goethe is such an exemplary personality, whom one must look to in order to study this living interaction of soul forces. And since he is a human being in whom one can actually follow how he rises from year to year in terms of the deepening of his own soul life and understanding of the world, we have in him an example of how human beings must strive to attain a deepening of their soul life. It is not merely the contemplation of Goethe, not the repetition of his sentences, not the acceptance of his works, but the grandeur that emanates from his entire appearance, exemplary for our present time, that is perhaps particularly striking on a day like today, which in the strict sense of the calendar commemorates Goethe's life. And today's scientific spirit in particular could learn a great deal from Goethe. This scientific spirit has not progressed very far in terms of understanding spiritual life, but it is precisely from this perspective that Goethe will and must celebrate a resurrection, that Goethe will and must gradually be understood more and more, because much of what can be called a healthy examination of our progress into the spiritual worlds, our spiritual science in general, can come from a consideration of Goethe, because everything in Goethe is healthy. Goethe is reliable in all things, and where he contradicts himself, it is not logical contradictions that arise, but because life itself contradicts itself and must contradict itself in order to be alive.

That was a thought I wanted to share with you today, on Goethe's birthday, to show how important it is that we delve into things that are right in front of us in a whole new way. Goethe can give us an infinite amount. He will give us the most if we forget much of what has been written about him in countless works, for that is more likely to cast a veil over the real Goethe than to help us get to know him. But Goethe has a secret attraction, Goethe has something that works through itself, and if you engage with Goethe, you will see that you can experience Goethe's birthday within yourself, that you experience something of what is eternally young and fresh in Goethe, of which one can say: Goethe can be reborn in a soul imbued with spiritual science. Our materialistic age, no matter how often it mentions Goethe's name, no matter how many of Goethe's works it cites, has very little understanding of him.

There were times when one could be truly fascinated by Goethe with one's whole soul, even when Goethe was discussed seriously – not in our literary-historical sense, which is not serious when the discussion is serious – there were people who were enthralled by such discussions because of the innermost spiritual nerve that always lies in Goethe. And here we should always remember how Rosenkranz, the Hegelian, in the 1930s and 1940s, how old Karl Rosenkranz, who was at the height of his education, took the risk of announcing lectures on Goethe at the University of Königsberg. He wanted to speak frankly and freely about what a philosopher has to say about Goethe. So he prepared his lectures and left his study with the thought: Well, perhaps you will have a few listeners after all. But this thought almost vanished when he stepped outside and saw such a terrible snowstorm that one would have thought no one would dare venture out onto the streets, and therefore no one would come to a lecture that was not necessary for earning a living. So he went there, and lo and behold, the conditions under which he had to lecture were the most unfavorable imaginable. It was a room that could not be heated, had no proper floor, and water was streaming down the walls everywhere. But the name Goethe had attracted a considerable number of people on the first evening of the lecture, and more and more kept coming. And even though the conditions became increasingly unfavorable and uncomfortable in the hall, so many people attended Karl Rosenkranz's lectures that the hall could hardly hold them all.

Goethe is one of those spirits who can inspire us most in an anthroposophical way, and we will if we tell ourselves that there was a great spirit in Goethe's physical body, which we must first study, we will arrive at an anthroposophical view in a healthier way than if we were presented with a physical body in which there is a great spirit that we are supposed to recognize on authority. There are truly healthy paths into anthroposophy. One only needs to follow them; one need not shy away from the effort. That is why I never shy away, even when there are many listeners at such a lecture series, from shining light on this or that side path of spiritual contemplation in a way that may be quite uncomfortable, from saying this or that daring thing, from saying this or that difficult thing. I will never shy away from doing so, because I know that only in this way is healthy progress for anthroposophy and a real integration of spiritual science into modern cultural life possible. And it seems to me that one can ascend to the highest spiritual regions without letting one's heart grow cold. It seems to me that all those gathered here can sense something of the fact that anthroposophy is being interpreted here with the means of the most modern spiritual life, and that it is a very great error when, even in the anthroposophical sphere, the strange judgment is expressed that something medieval, something that does not correspond to modern science, is being rehashed for people here. Because this is said by some, even in the anthroposophical field, it must be pointed out: those who can follow with understanding will know that nothing medieval, nothing objectively scientific, is being sought in conjunction with true modern spiritual striving. It is not for me to judge how far this is achieved. But it should at least be recognized that nothing medieval, nothing merely connected with tradition, is being sought, but something objective, equal to modern science. And that our hearts can be moved by the conditions of life that arise from this anthroposophical view may also appear to be something certain. This seems to me to be the most important thing that we can take from such a consideration for our hearts and carry out into the world. What we have grasped in the breadth of concepts and words is drawn together in our hearts, we live it in our feelings and sensations, in our compassion, we live it out in our deeds — and then we live anthroposophy. And just as rivers can only flow out over the land when they draw their water from their sources, so the life of anthroposophy can only flow out into the world when it draws its strength from the sources of wisdom that are opened to us today by those spiritual powers we call the Masters of Wisdom and the Harmony of Feelings. And we have grasped spiritual science in the true sense of the word when it speaks to us in the forms of modern spiritual life, but at the same time does not leave our hearts and souls cold, but warms them so that this warmth can also be communicated to others throughout the world. The more you carry out into the world what is said here, not only through your thoughts, but through your feelings, your impulses of will, and your deeds, the more these lectures will have been of benefit. And that is the aim of these lectures.

With this wish, my dear friends, I always greet you in my heart when you come here, and with these wishes I greet you today, as we conclude this series of lectures and I say to you: Let us be together in a spiritual and intellectual sense, even if we must live in different places. And let us take from the time when we can be closer to one another in space as the most beautiful mutual greeting, as the most beautiful mutual farewell, that we are together in spirit, even when we are scattered in space. In this sense, I say to you today, as we stand at the end of our cycle on Goethe's birthday, the greeting at the end of this series of lectures. Let us think often of what has united us, and let this also be fruitful for the personal bond that can always be woven between one person and another in love. Let us be together in this sense, even when we are apart, and let this sense bring us together again and again, so that we may rise to the heights of the spirit, of the supernatural life.