Initiation, Eternity and the Passing Moment
GA 138
27 August 1912, Munich
Lecture III
If we would speak of initiation and its significance for human life and evolution, we must try to probe into the essential nature of all this with the concepts and modes of thought that are indispensable to any true description of super-sensible worlds. It is comprehensible that at every stage of its development the human soul should experience the deepest longing to discover the nature of the worlds more or less justifiably described as eternal. Surely it is also comprehensible that, at first, human souls should try to probe into higher worlds without much preparation and with the ordinary ideas and concepts of the life of the senses. I expressly say that this is comprehensible, and this may, to a certain extent, apply where the longing after eternity is satisfied by one or other of the religious faiths. But when it is a question of gaining a deeper insight into the course of all spiritual things, particularly into the course of all life of the soul in the real anthroposophical sense, we must gradually accustom ourselves to the necessity of submitting our ideas, concepts and modes of thought to a certain change before we are able to form correct ideas of the higher, super-sensible worlds. Because this is particularly necessary for an actual description of the Christ event, as we shall see in the next lectures, I may perhaps be allowed to say a few words today about the transformation and re-molding of man's conceptual life that is necessary if he would arrive at ideas about the super-sensible worlds.
For this, we must become familiar with the idea that everything is different in the super-sensible world from what it is in the world of the senses because an exact repetition of any world existence is nowhere to be found in the universe. If everything is different, why should it be assumed that human conceptions and representations hold good in the higher worlds as they do in the life of the senses? They certainly do not. Anyone really pursuing the practical path into the worlds opened to him by initiation, anyone having actual experience of super-sensible life, well knows that not only must he transform many things in himself—I might equally say, leave them behind with the Guardian of the Threshold—but he must also lay aside many of his habits, representations and concepts before he can enter the higher worlds.
We will proceed first of all from certain ideas to which we must all undoubtedly be subject in physical life. Here two concepts, or systems of concepts, have a decisive effect. In our life of the senses they stand side by side; they run parallel. The one consists of all the ideas we form about the natural world, about the forces and laws of nature. Side by side with all these ideas of ours, there exists in ordinary sensory life what we call the moral world order, the sum of our moral conceptions, thoughts and ideas. If a man takes accurate stock of himself, he must soon come to the conclusion that in the life of the senses these two systems of concepts natural order and moral world order—must be kept distinct. If we are describing a plant, we analyse it according to natural forces and natural laws. Let us suppose it is a poisonous plant. We do not confuse our description with the issue of whether or not it is morally responsible for being poisonous. We maintain that it is part of sound thinking in the life of the senses, when describing the world of nature, to rid ourselves of what we call moral concepts and ideas. We know that we must do the same, too, when we want to gain a clear and objective idea of the animal world. We feel, for instance, that it would be senseless to hold a lion responsible for its cruelty in the same way as we should a man. But if many modern naturalists are finding something like moral conceptions in the animal kingdom, I might say more as a matter of preference than from any real necessity, to a certain extent this may be justified. At the same time, we can at most speak of an echo, of a suggestion, of moral concepts in what animals do and in what happens in the animal kingdom. A simple development of the interpretation of nature requires that we should free ourselves from moral concepts so long as these interpretations are confined to the world of the senses. Then, however, as unprejudiced and thoughtful observation of oneself must affirm, the moral world order enters with authority into our life, making unconditional and absolute demands. We know it is his moral ideas that decide the world of a man, and indeed not only his worth in human social life. It also makes one able to say that even a man who is not moral, if he be granted grace at some special moment to reflect quietly about himself, will determine his own value as a human being according to the moral ideas that light up in his consciousness. It must repeatedly be emphasised that these two systems of concepts must be kept properly distinct.
All this becomes quite different the moment the higher, super-sensible worlds are entered, and one gains the power of perceiving, observing, experiencing and living outside the physical body. When such observation is really attained, it takes place at first in the etheric body of which I spoke yesterday. Then, later, the world, or rather a second super-sensible world, is observed with the astral body. The further we rise into higher worlds, the more do the concepts and ideas that we have worked upon and acquired in the ordinary physical world lose their significance. They must be transformed if we are rightly to describe and understand what comes to meet us in the super-sensible worlds. In the ordinary world of sense existence, we have only one thing to remind us of a fundamental fact familiar to every clairvoyant, and that is when we speak in symbols and metaphors so that our words re-echo what in actual reality is only experienced in higher worlds. When the expression is used that greed or jealousy or hate “burns,” there is something in such an expression that belongs to the many wonderful mysteries of the creative activity of speech, where there shines down into primitive, elementary human consciousness what, in its reality, is only present in the higher worlds. Everyone knows that when he speaks of a “burning hate” he does not mean a burning like the burning of a fire in the external world. He knows that he is speaking figuratively, but that it would avail him nothing to try to explain the objects and processes of nature by calling moral ideas to his aid. In speaking, however, of processes in the higher worlds, it is not in the same metaphorical, figurative sense that we use such expressions. I may perhaps remind you that in my mystery play, The Guardian of the Threshold, certain processes of the soul, feelings and desires, are twice spoken of as “burning” in the higher world. This expression is not to be taken as a metaphor; it stands for something quite real and actual, a spiritual reality. Lucifer, for instance, would never say that something burned him in the same sense as a man in the physical world would speak of hate burning him. Lucifer would say it in a real and literal sense. For what in super-sensible worlds might be compared to the natural order, to the natural processes of the sense world, is far more intimately connected with what may be called the moral world within the super-sensible world, than is the case with these two ideas in the world of the senses.
We can gain some idea of all this at once if we turn to man's etheric body. When speaking of the physical body, we can talk of raising a hand to perform a moral action. We can see the hand with our physical eyes and, to explain its functions, we can investigate it through knowledge belonging to the material world. This description of the hand in physical existence is not essentially different whether we have to do with a hand performing a moral or an immoral action. So far as we can give a description of the hand in physical life at all, we have no business to mix with the question of how the hand is formed and all that we bring to its explanation, the other question of whether it is the habit of performing moral actions or not.
The matter is different where a man's etheric body is concerned. Suppose that to clairvoyant vision a man's etheric body, or some particular part of it, appears incompletely developed. On enquiring into the true cause of such being the case with some particular organ, we find that the reason for the imperfect development lies in a moral fault, in some moral deficiency in the man. Thus, man's moral qualities are actually expressed to some extent in his etheric body. They are still more distinctly and more intensively expressed in his astral body. While, therefore, in the case of a man, we should be doing him a great injustice by assuming that some physical deformity were the expression of something in his moral nature, in what concerns the moral world it is certainly true that if we think of the expressions natural order, natural processes and moral causes as merging into one another in the higher worlds, moral qualities are actual natural causes and are there expressed in forms and processes. To avoid any misunderstanding, I should like expressly to state that the perfect or imperfect development of man's higher organism—his etheric and astral bodies, his higher bodies if we may so call them—need have nothing to do with the perfect or imperfect development of his physical body. A man may even have some physical organ crippled from birth, while the corresponding etheric organ may not only show a perfectly normal development but, in certain circumstances, a more perfect development more complete in itself, when the corresponding physical organ is thus crippled or deformed. The idea, therefore, that moral qualities are faithfully expressed in the form of the body cannot be applied to physical existence, but it is nevertheless absolutely true of the part of man that belongs to super-sensible worlds.
Thus we see that the natural order and the moral order, which apparently run side by side in the ordinary life of the senses, are interwoven in the super-sensible worlds, and in speaking of some part of the etheric body, we can well say that such and such a form is due to hate. Hate shows itself in this member of the etheric body in quite a different way from how love is expressed. We may speak thus where the super-sensible worlds are concerned, but it would have no meaning were we confined to a description of nature in the world of the senses. This necessity to change our concepts when the higher worlds are in question is a particularly distinctive feature as regards what, in ordinary sensory life are reckoned as cravings or desires. We may ask how cravings, desires and emotions appear to us in the life of the senses. They appear in such a way that we seem to see them arise from the very recesses of man's soul being. If we see any particular craving aroused in a man, we are then able to recognise something of his inner condition and how it causes this craving to arise. We can see that it is above all the inner nature of the soul that determines the character of the man's desires. We know quite well, for instance, that a piece of veal will call up quite different cravings in two different men. It does not depend on the veal, but on all that a physical man has in his soul. A Raphael Madonna may leave one man completely cold, while another may experience a whole world of feeling. We may thus say that man's world of desire is kindled within his inmost nature.
All this is changed when we enter the super-sensible world. It is foolish to say that one cannot speak of desires and so forth in super-sensible worlds. They do actually exist, and they are determined in the great majority of cases by external things—by what a being sees and perceives. Hence, a clairvoyant in these worlds cannot get such a near view of the inner conditions of the being he meets when wanting to discover his desires and cravings, but he has to observe the super-sensible surroundings of the being in question. When, therefore, in the super-sensible world, he perceives a being having desires, longings, emotions, he does not look at the being himself, as we should do in the physical world, but he looks at the surroundings. He looks to see what other beings are present in the neighbourhood. He will always find that the nature of the being's desires and emotions vary according to the kind of beings who surround him because there, desires and emotions can always be explained by external things.
A case in point may make all this clearer for you. Suppose a man enters the super-sensible worlds either through the first stages of initiation or by passing through the gate of death. A clairvoyant then observes him in the super-sensible worlds. Let us assume that the man had taken some imperfection belonging to his character with him out of physical existence—some kind of incapacity, a moral imperfection, perhaps some crime committed in the physical world that stays with him in the super-sensible worlds as a torturing memory. To make a search for this, it is not so much a question of the clairvoyant looking into the inner soul of the man, as it is of observing his surroundings. Why should this be? It is because this content of soul, this quality of soul that the man carries over with him as an imperfection or moral flaw performs something real, something actual. It guides the man and brings him to a particular place in the super-sensible world, to the very place where there is some being who possesses in perfection what is imperfect in the man who is newly arrived. Thus, this moral flaw, this consciousness of a faculty lacking, has an actual effect. It guides a man along a certain path and confronts him with a being possessing in perfection the very quality lacking in himself, and he is condemned to continual contemplation of this being.
Thus, in the super-sensible worlds we come into the presence of beings who possess all that we ourselves do not possess, and they show us what we lack. We are not drawn to them by what in physical life are called desires, but by means of a real process. If the clairvoyant sees what kinds of beings surround a man there, he can, by objective observation tell what the man lacks and what are his failings. The being into whose presence the man comes, at whom he is condemned to go on gazing, stands there as a continual reproach, one might say. This reproach, standing outside him, has the effect of rousing within him what in super-sensible worlds might be called a craving, a desire, to become different. It arouses in him the activity and strength to work his own transformation, so that he may rid himself of his fault, of his imperfection. You need not exclaim that the super-sensible worlds must, therefore, always be able to show forth beings having in perfection all that we lack! The super-sensible worlds are indeed rich enough to be able to confront us with beings perfect in everything where we are in fault. They are far richer than we in physical life can imagine. Yes, indeed, the super-sensible world is always able to confront man with a being having in perfection everything in which he himself is imperfect!
This gives some idea of how desires and cravings are real forces, determining our path in the super-sensible world. It is not as though our desires represented something objective in which we could remain stationary. But according to what we are, we are led on our way and placed where all that we lack appears before us as something real, or as an effective reproach. It might easily be said that if this is so man would be completely without freedom in super-sensible worlds because he would be confronted with an external world that would determine how he was to work upon himself. On further observation, however, in super-sensible worlds it turns out that while one being may feel the reproach and begin to work toward perfection, another may resist and fight against imitating what is thus placed as a reproach before him. But this resistance works quite differently in the super-sensible worlds from how it does in the world of the senses. When a being refuses thus to work on himself, he is driven back into other worlds that are strange to him, where he does not know the way, and where the necessary conditions of life are lacking. In other words, this being condemns himself to a kind of inward process of destruction. One may always either choose the fruitful, helpful process shown to one and behave oneself accordingly, or inoculate oneself with destructive forces by resisting it. One has this amount of freedom. But reciprocal action definitely takes place between what is moral and all that is going on in super-sensible space.
A further example of this is that our conceptions of beauty and ugliness, quite in place in the world of the senses, can really no longer be applied when we ascend into super-sensible worlds. Indeed, there are manifold reasons why these conceptions can no longer be used there in the way in which they are used in the world of the senses. When we perceive in super-sensible worlds, we see above all a significant difference in the various beings that meet us. By virtue of the intuitive knowledge that will then be ours, we will be able to say that the being we are looking at is able, and has the will, actually to reveal in his external appearance all that is within him.
Let us assume that such a being has an etheric light-body, that it is one of the beings who do not incarnate into the world of the senses but who only in higher worlds take on a light-body or something of that nature. This light-body may be the expression of what such a being is within. It is not like a man in the sense world who confronts us in a definite form and yet may be hiding within him the most manifold feelings and sentiments, so that he is able to say, “My feelings are for myself alone. What is seen of me externally is my natural form, and I am well able to conceal what appears in my soul.” That is not the case with certain beings in the super-sensible worlds; their external form is the most direct expression of what they bear within them. In their component parts, what they are lies fully open to view. But there are other beings unable directly to express, to manifest, their real nature in their external super-sensible appearance. Confronted by beings of this kind, clairvoyant consciousness has the feeling of something repellent, something from which it wants to get away, something oppressive that may even be offensive.
Thus, we can distinguish two kinds of beings, those who are perfectly willing to expose their inner nature, to reveal what is within them, and beings who give one the feeling that what they expose is definitely distorted and what is within them is concealed and does not issue forth. In man's life of the senses, one cannot say to the same extent, when one person is capable of being secretive and another is perfectly frank, that the difference lies in their natures. Their features may be different, but they belong to the same world as far as their natures are concerned. In the super-sensible worlds, however, those who reveal all that they have within them, and those who do not, are two radically different kinds of beings. If we would use the words beautiful and ugly with approximately the meaning we have in the world of the senses, we must apply them to these two kinds of beings. In the super-sensible world we only come to the point by calling the beings who reveal everything, beautiful, for in front of them we feel just as we do before a beautiful picture. But the beings who do not reveal their natures in their external form are felt to be ugly. Thus, if we can put it so, beauty or ugliness depends upon the fundamental natures of the beings.
What is the consequence of this? When clairvoyant consciousness enters a world where it must have these feelings about beauty and ugliness, much in its whole mode of feeling must undergo a change. It is quite natural for the clairvoyant to say that a being revealing all that he has within him is beautiful, and the other idea immediately arises that to be beautiful is to be upright and honest. A being is beautiful because he hides nothing, because he bears in his very countenance what is within him. True and beautiful are one and the same when we enter the super-sensible world. A being who does not reveal what is within him is ugly. That is immediately felt by clairvoyant consciousness. But there is the further feeling that he lies and does not show what he ought. What is ugly is at the same time untruthful! What is true, upright and honest is at the same time beautiful; what is ugly is untruthful. In the super-sensible worlds a point is reached when a separation between the concepts beautiful and true, in the one case, and between ugly and untrue in the other, loses all meaning. So the expression beautiful must be used of a being who is felt to be honest and upright, while the opposite feeling must be called ugly.
We see here how moral and aesthetic concepts merge when the higher worlds are reached. It is a peculiar feature of this ascent into super-sensible worlds that concepts do thus merge into one another, that things to which we refer separately in the world of the physical senses become linked and fused together. Hence, other modes of feeling must be acquired if expressions of the sense world are to be used of super-sensible beings. One is almost always obliged to represent these things more simply, and still more in accordance with physical consciousness than really coincides with a strictly correct representation because they become so complicated.
To my explanation of how the concepts true, upright and beautiful, in the one case, and ugly and untruthful in the other, become linked together, I must add something further. On making one's way into super-sensible worlds one may meet a being who, according to all ideas acquired in the life of the senses, must be called beautiful, perhaps even exquisite—beautiful, radiant and exquisite. There is the picture! But simply because this being appears in such a form, is no proof that it is also a good being; it may even be quite an evil being and yet stand before one in this sublime, angelic form. According to the idea of beauty that we have in the sense world, we should call such a being beautiful in its super-sensible appearance. How could we help it? Seeing it thus in the world of the senses we should be quite right in calling it beautiful. It may really be the ugliest being in existence, and yet, if one uses the expressions of the sense world, the word beautiful must be used. It may be an utterly evil being, containing hidden wickedness and untruthfulness, a very devil in the form of an angel; this is quite possible in super-sensible worlds. Still, in diverse ways of which we still have to speak, one may gradually get to the truth of the matter by approaching it in clairvoyant consciousness. One is confronted by this angelic form and if, during super-sensible vision, one has become capable of coherent thought, it is possible for one to say, “I must not let myself be deceived by the fact that I am looking at something angelic or a wonderful form of some kind; anything is possible; it may be an angel but also it could be a devil.” One may now begin with what must so often be undertaken on entering higher worlds, that is, a good examination of oneself.
We may seek counsel with ourselves to find out how many bad points such as selfishness or egoism we possess. Then our soul becomes permeated with bitterness and remorse. But this bitterness, this pain, may be the very thing to lead us to purify and cleanse ourselves from our selfishness and egoism. When, through this, one comes to see how little one is free from self, and how necessary it is to struggle to be free, then the whole process in the soul lights up. Now, if we have got so far as not to lose our vision while taking stock of ourselves as usually happens at first, the angel in certain cases may be revealed as no angel at all, but may assume an ugly form. Then one can gradually reach the point of saying to oneself, “I myself gave this wicked being the power to express its wickedness by masquerading before me in a quite different form, but, by permeating myself with purer feelings, I have forced it to show me its true form.”
Consequently, a process of the soul has a compelling force in the super-sensible world. We ourselves either make it possible for these beings to lie to us, or we compel them to show themselves in their true form. The appearance of the super-sensible world to us depends on how and with what qualities we enter it. What is called the source of illusion must be dealt with in quite a different way from what is customary.
Someone may enter the super-sensible world and describe all sorts of glorious things. If you told him he had been deceived he would not believe it, for did he not see it all? But he did not see what he would have seen had he done what I have just described. Had he acted in this way he would at once have seen the truth: It is beautiful when a devil shows himself as a devil but it is ugly for him to appear in the form of an angel.
When we enter the super-sensible world, we must above all rid ourselves of the habit of speaking of things according to the ideas we gained of them in the world of the senses. If we keep to these ideas we shall first say to the form appearing to us that it is a beautiful angel and afterwards that it is a hideous devil. But clairvoyant consciousness, if it is to give a correct description, cannot express it thus. On the contrary, it must say of the ugly devil that it is a beautiful devil, even though, according to material conceptions, it is quite hideous. We do not arrive at this point simply by turning upside down all the ideas gained from the life of the senses. That would certainly be an easy way. Anyone could then describe the devachanic plane, for instance, by putting beautiful for all that was ugly in the sense world, ugly for beautiful, red for green, white for black, and so forth. But that cannot be done; the concepts of the super-sensible worlds must be acquired by experience. We must acquire them gradually, as a growing child acquires sense conceptions, not by theory but by experience. When we become conscious that we are speaking in the language of the super-sensible world, it will no longer seem natural to call a devil ugly if he appears as a devil. Feelings of this kind must be acquired if we are to find our bearings in the super-sensible world and to know our way about there. From this it will be easy to form some idea of what is meant when, for the sake of simplicity, we say, “On the one side stands the world of the senses, on the other, the super-sensible worlds”. Super-sensible existence is entered by crossing the boundary of sensory life, but if it be entered with all that is gained from this life, if the conceptions and ideas acquired in the sense world are applied there, they are of no use and the wrong construction is put upon things. One must learn to transform one's knowledge at the boundary, not just theoretically but in a living way. Ideas acquired in the life of the senses cannot be used at all on crossing over; they must be left behind. So you see how at the boundary much must be left behind of all that is so intimately woven into us in the world of sense existence.
I should like now to describe the matter not theoretically but from the point of view of concrete perception. Let us suppose that someone, having acquired the capacity for crossing the boundary of which we have been speaking, enters the super-sensible world from the world of the senses. At the boundary he asks himself, “What must I leave behind now, so as to feel at home in the super-sensible world?” After due reflection he will say, “I must really leave behind everything I have experienced, learned or acquired in my various earthly incarnations from primeval times up to the present. I must lay everything aside here because I am entering a world in which all that can be learned during incarnation has no further meaning.” It is quite easy to say such a thing, easy to hear and easy to grasp it in the abstraction of a concept. But it is an entirely new inner world really to experience such a thing, to feel it livingly, to lay aside like a garment all that one has appropriated during incarnations in sensory existence in order to enter a world where it no longer has any meaning. If this becomes a living feeling, then one has a living experience that really has nothing to do with theory. It is a living experience such as we have in the world of reality when we actually meet a man and make his acquaintance, and when he speaks and behaves in a certain manner toward us, so that we learn to know him in a way we should were we living with him, not just by making concepts about him.
Here we stand at the boundary between the life of the senses and spiritual life, confronted not by a system of concepts but by a reality that only works super-sensibly, and as concretely and livingly as a human being. This is the Guardian of the Threshold. He is there as a concrete and real being. When we learn to know him, we know he belongs to those beings who, to a certain extent, have taken part in life since primeval times on earth, but who have not gone through what one experiences as a being of soul. This is the being who, in the mystery play, The Guardian of the Threshold, is meant to be expressed dramatically in the words:
Thou knowest well, who has been guardian
Of this realm's threshold since the world began,
What beings need to cross the threshold o'er
Who to thy time and to thy kind belong ...
This “to thy time and to thy kind” is something that proceeds indeed, from the very essence of the matter. Of other times and other kinds are the men, the beings, who since primeval times have in a certain sense separated themselves from the path of humanity on earth, and in each of these we meet a being of whom we may say, “I have a being before me who experiences and lives through a great deal in the world, but he does not concern himself with all the love and grief and pain that can be experienced on earth, nor yet with the failings and immorality there. He neither knows nor wishes to know anything of what has taken place up to now in the depths of man's nature.” Christian tradition expresses this in the words: “When confronted by the mystery of man's becoming, such beings veiled their faces.” A whole world is expressed in this contrast between such beings and human beings.
Now a feeling arises as immediately as does the feeling we have on meeting a fair-haired man, that “he has fair hair.” There comes this feeling: In passing through various earthly cultures. I have naturally acquired faults, but I must get back again to my original state; I must retrace my steps on earth, and this being can show me the way just because he does not possess my faults. One has before one a being who stands there majestically as an actual reproach, but at the same time spurring one on toward all that one is not. The being shows one this most vividly, and one can feel one's own being completely filled with the knowledge of what he is and what he is not. There one stands before this living reproach. This being belongs to the rank of archangels. The meeting actually takes place, and has the effect of suddenly revealing to us what we have become as earthly man in sensory existence. This is direct self-knowledge in the truest and broadest sense. You see yourself as you are; you also see yourself as you ought to become!
But it is not always fit for man to see himself thus. Today I have only spoken of the world of concept and idea that has to be discarded. But much else must be laid aside. When we reach the Guardian of the Threshold, we must really lay aside all that we know of ourselves, but we must still retain something to carry on with us. That is the chief thing. This knowledge that we have to leave everything behind at the threshold is an inner experience in itself to which one must have attained, and the preparation for this stage of clairvoyance must consist in schooling ourselves to bear what would otherwise be full of terror and fear. With proper schooling we need not speak of danger because such a schooling does away with danger. Powers of endurance must be attained through due preparation; they are the fundamental force necessary for all further experience. In ordinary life man is not capable of enduring all that he must endure when standing before the Guardian of the Threshold.
The Guardian of the Threshold is there for a strange purpose. If it is not to be misunderstood, it has to be judged from the standpoint of the super-sensible world. In man, the activities of the super-sensible world are always at work, though he knows nothing of this. Whenever we think and feel and will, it always necessitates a certain activity of the, astral body and connection with the astral world. But man knows nothing of this; if he knew what his bodies really were he would not be able to bear it and would be stunned by it. So that when man meets this being without sufficient preparation, everything must be veiled from him, including the being. The being must draw a veil over the super-sensible world. He must do this for the protection of man who, while within the world of the senses, could not endure the sight. In this we really see a concept that, in the world of the senses, can only be judged morally, as the most direct ordering of nature. The protection of man from sight of the super-sensible world is the function of the Guardian of the Threshold. He must hold man back until he has completed the necessary preparation.
We have here tried to gather up a few ideas that may help us to form a concept of the Guardian of the Threshold. I have tried to collect ideas, concepts and experiences of this kind in a little book, A Road to Self Knowledge, that will be in your hands in the course of the next few days. It may be helpful to you in conjunction with these lectures. The book will consist of a series of eight meditations, and is so conceived that should the reader carry them out, he will gain something definite for his life of soul. Today I have tried to deal with a few of the ideas that can lead us to the Guardian of the Threshold. Starting from this point we shall pass beyond the Guardian of the Threshold, and try to gain some degree of insight and perspective from which we can reach a yet deeper understanding of the Christ Being and of the Christ Initiation.
Dritter Vortrag
Wenn wir von der Initiation und ihrer Bedeutung für das ganze menschliche Leben und für die menschliche Entwickelung sprechen wollen, müssen wir in das Wesen dessen, um was es sich eigentlich handelt, aus denjenigen Begriffen und Vorstellungen heraus einzudringen versuchen, welche nun einmal notwendig sind, um die übersinnlichen Welten überhaupt in richtiger Art zu charakterisieren. Es ist ja begreiflich, daß die menschliche Seele auf jeder Stufe ihrer Entwickelung die allertiefste Sehnsucht danach hat, etwas darüber zu erfahren, wie es in jenen Welten aussieht, denen man in mehr oder weniger berechtigter Weise das Prädikat der Ewigkeit beilegen kann. Daher muß es auch begreiflich erscheinen, daß die menschlichen Seelen danach trachten, ohne viel Vorbereitung erst mit den Vorstellungen, mit den Begriffen, die man im Sinnensein hat, in diese höheren Welten hineinzudringen. Ich sage ausdrücklich: das ist begreiflich. Und dem kann auch in einer gewissen Weise entsprochen werden da, wo es sich um Befriedigung der Ewigkeitssehnsucht in diesen oder jenen Religionsbekenntnissen handelt. Wenn es sich aber in wahrhaft theosophischem Sinne darum handelt, tiefer in den Urquell alles Geistigen und damit namentlich in den Urquell alles seelischen Lebens einzudringen, dann muß man - nach und nach wenigstens - sich befreunden mit der Notwendigkeit, seine Vorstellungen, seine Begriffe in einer gewissen Weise umzuwandeln, bevor man sich richtige Ideen von den höheren, den übersinnlichen Welten machen will. Weil dies - wie wir in den nächsten Vorträgen sehen werden - insbesondere zur Charakteristik der eigentlichen ChristusErscheinung notwendig ist, sei es mir heute gestattet, einiges über die notwendige Umwandlung und Umformung des menschlichen Vorstellungslebens zu sprechen, wenn der Mensch hinaufdringen will zu Ideen über die übersinnlichen Welten.
Damit muß man sich schon einmal bekanntmachen, daß in den übersinnlichen Welten alles anders ist als in dem Sinnensein, denn eine genaue Wiederholung eines Weltendaseins findet sich eigentlich nirgends im Universum. Wenn nun alles anders ist, warum sollte dann durchaus angenommen werden, daß die menschlichen Vorstellungen und Begriffe für die höheren Welten in gleichem Maße gültig seien, wie sie gültig sind für das Sinnensein? Das sind sie eben nicht. Wer den praktischen Aufstieg in diejenigen Welten, welche die Initiation eröffnet, wirklich vollführt, das heißt wer Erfahrungen hat im übersinnlichen Erleben, der weiß, wie wir gleich hören werden, daf$ er nicht nur vieles sonstiges an sich wandeln muß, ich könnte hier gleich sprechen: zurücklassen muß beim Hüter der Schwelle, sondern auch viele von seinen Gewohnheiten, Vorstellungen, Begriffen und Ideen dort ablegen muß, bevor er in die übersinnlichen, höheren Welten eindringen kann.
Vor allen Dingen wollen wir ausgehen von gewissen Vorstellungen, die uns ja alle im Sinnensein beherrschen müssen. Ein Begriffspaar, möchte ich sagen, zwei Begriffssysteme sind da besonders ausschlaggebend. Sie stehen für unser Sinnensein nebeneinander, laufen nebeneinander her. Das eine ist alles, was wir uns an Vorstellungen machen über die natürliche Welt, über die Naturgesetze, Naturkräfte. Neben alledem, was wir uns darüber an Vorstellungen bilden, steht für unser gewöhnliches Leben im Sinnensein das, was wir nennen die moralische Weltordnung, die Summe unserer moralischen Vorstellungen, Begriffe und Ideen. Bei einer richtigen Selbstbesinnung wird der Mensch sehr bald darauf verfallen, daß er für das Sinnensein diese beiden Begriffssysteme - Naturordnung und moralische Weltordnung - auseinanderhalten müsse. Wenn wir eine Pflanze erklären - nehmen wir an, wir haben eine Giftpflanze vor uns -, so erklären wir sie aus den Naturkräften, aus den Naturgesetzen heraus. Und ich möchte sagen, wir verderben uns die Erklärung der Pflanze nicht dadurch, daß wir die Pflanze dafür moralisch verantwortlich machen, daß sie eine Giftpflanze ist. Wir halten dafür, daß es zum gesunden Denken innerhalb des Sinnenseins bei den Erklärungen des natürlichen Daseins gehört, uns zunächst von dem zu emanzipieren, was wir die moralischen Begriffe und Ideen nennen. Wir wissen ja, daß wir diese Art von Emanzipation selbst noch üben müssen, wenn wir zu unbefangenen, objektiven Vorstellungen im Tierreiche kommen wollen. Es hätte keinen Sinn, so fühlen und empfinden wir, den Löwen für seine Grausamkeit ebenso verantwortlich zu machen, wie wir einen Menschen für seine Grausamkeit verantwortlich machen. Und wenn viele heutige Naturerklärer schon im Tierreiche so etwas wie moralische Begriffe finden, ich möchte sagen, mehr nach dem Geschmack als nach einer wahrhaftigen Notwendigkeit, so mag das schon in einem gewissen Sinne berechtigt sein. Aber man kann doch nur sprechen von einem Anklang an moralische Vorstellungen bei dem, was die Tiere tun, was im Tierreiche geschieht. Naturerklärung erfordert, wenn wir sie rein entwickeln sollen, ein Emanzipieren von moralischen VorstelJungen und Begriffen, wenn wir mit unseren Erklärungen unmittelbar im Sinnensein verbleiben wollen. Dann aber tritt in unser Leben herein majestätisch, möchte man sagen, mit unbedingten, absoluten Forderungen - so wird eine unbefangene Selbstbeobachtung und Selbstbesinnung sagen - die moralische Weltordnung. Und man weiß, daß die moralischen Vorstellungen dasjenige sind, was über den Wert des Menschen entscheidet; ja, nicht nur über den Wert des Menschen innerhalb des menschlichen Zusammenlebens, sondern so entscheidet, daß man selbst sagen kann: Auch der, welcher sich der Unmoralität bezichtigen muß, wird, wenn er damit begnadet sein kann oder könnte, in einem besonderen Momente ruhig über sich nachzudenken, seinen eigenen Wert als Menschenwesen danach bestimmen, wie die in sein Bewußtsein hereinleuchtenden moralischen Vorstellungen sind. Das muß immer wieder betont werden, daf$ man diese zwei Vorstellungssysteme gehörig voneinander unterscheidet.
Dies wird völlig anders in dem Augenblicke, wo man die höheren Welten betritt, wo man dazu gelangt, außerhalb seines physischen Leibes wahrzunehmen, zu beobachten, zu erleben, zu erfahren, und dadurch in höhere übersinnliche Welten eintritt. Zuerst beobachtet man ja, wenn man wirklich zu einem Beobachten gelangt, mit jenem Leibe, von dem ich gestern einiges angedeutet habe: mit dem elementarischen oder ätherischen Leibe. Dann betrachtet man die Welt - oder vielmehr eine zweite übersinnliche Welt - mit seinem astralischen Leibe. Und je weiter man hinaufsteigt in die höheren Welten, desto mehr verlieren die Vorstellungen, die Begriffe, die man sich erarbeitet, die man gewonnen hat in der gewöhnlichen physischen Welt, ihre Bedeutung. Sie müssen sich wandeln, damit wir in richtiger Weise das bezeichnen und verstehen können, was uns in den übersinnlichen höheren Welten entgegentritt. In der gewöhnlichen Welt des Sinnenseins haben wir nur eines, was uns an eine fundamentale Tatsache erinnern kann, die jeder hellsichtige Mensch kennt: man spricht in Sinnbildern, in Symbolen, so daß die Worte wiederum anklingen an das, was wieder erst in seiner Realität, in seiner Wirklichkeit in den höheren Welten erfahren wird. Wenn jemand das Wort gebraucht: Geiz oder Neid oder Haß «brenne», so ist in einem solchen Wort eigentlich etwas enthalten, was man zu jenen vielen wunderbaren Geheimnissen der sprachschöpferischen Tätigkeit rechnet, wo hereinleuchtet in das primitive, elementarische menschliche Bewußtsein dasjenige, was in seiner Wirklichkeit erst in den höheren Welten vorhanden ist. Denn jeder weiß, daß er, wenn er von brennendem Haß spricht, nicht ein Brennen meint, wie es das natürliche Brennen eines Feuers draußen in der natürlichen Welt ist; er weiß, daß er sozusagen im übertragenen Sinne spricht, und daß es ihm nichts helfen würde, wenn er Dinge und Vorgänge der Natur dadurch erklären wollte, daß er moralische Vorstellungen zu Hilfe rufen wollte. Sobald man von Vorgängen der höheren Welten spricht, spricht man nicht in demselben Sinne sinnbildlich oder in einem Anklange, wenn man solche Ausdrücke gebraucht. - Ich darf wohl daran erinnern, daß zweimal in dem Drama «Der Hüter der Schwelle» der Ausdruck gebraucht ist, daß gewisse seelische Vorgänge, Empfindungen, Wünsche «brennen» in den höheren Welten. Damit ist nicht etwas wie ein Sinnbild, sondern etwas ganz Reales, Wirkliches, real Spirituelles gemeint. Luzifer zum Beispiel würde niemals in demselben Sinne sagen: dieses oder jenes brenne ihn, wie ein Mensch im Sinnensein vom Haß sagen könnte, er brenne ihn; sondern Luzifer würde es sagen in wahrhaftem, ganz wirklichem Sinne. Was man nämlich in den übersinnlichen Welten vergleichen könnte mit der Naturordnung, mit den Naturvorgängen der sinnlichen Welt, steht in diesen übersinnlichen Welten in einem viel innigeren Zusammenhange mit dem, was man für diese Welten wiederum moralische Welten nennen kann, als diese beiden Vorstellungsreihen hier in der Sinneswelt zueinander stehen.
Wir können uns sogleich einen Begriff von diesen beiden Vorstellungen bilden, wenn wir zu des Menschen elementarischem Leibe gehen. Solange wir beim physischen Leibe bleiben, können wir sagen, eine Hand könne sich erheben, um eine moralische Tat zu begehen. Wir sehen sie mit unseren sinnlichen Augen, untersuchen sie mit der zu der sinnlichen Welt gehörigen Wissenschaft, um ihre Funktionen zu erklären. Diese Erklärung der Hand innerhalb des Sinnenseins wird sich nicht wesentlich unterscheiden, ob wir es zu tun haben mit einer Hand, die ausholt zu einer moralischen oder zu einer unmoralischen Tat. Wie auch die Hand geformt ist, soweit sie überhaupt im Sinnensein erklärt werden kann: in das, was wir herbeitragen zur Erklärung der Hand, dürfen wir nicht hineinmischen, ob diese Hand gewöhnlich zu moralischen oder unmoralischen Taten ausholt. Anders liegt die Sache mit dem elementarischen Leibe des Menschen. Dieser elementarische Leib, zum Beispiel irgendein Glied desselben, erscheint für das hellseherische Bewußtsein unvollkommen ausgebildet. Und wenn wir uns fragen, warum in einem entsprechenden Fall dies bei einem Organ des elementarischen Leibes ist, wenn wir nach den wahren Ursachen fragen, so erscheint uns als der Grund einer solchen unvollkommenen Ausbildung zum Beispiel irgendein moralischer Fehler, irgendein moralischer Mangel, eine moralische Unvollkommenheit des Menschen. Im elementarischen Leibe drückt sich tatsächlich die moralische Qualität des Menschen schon in einer gewissen Weise aus. Noch deutlicher, noch intensiver aber drückt sie sich aus in dem astralischen Leibe. Während man also einem Menschen durchaus Unrecht täte, bei dem man annehmen wollte, daß irgendeine Verstümmelung der Ausdruck wäre von etwas Moralischem in ihm, ist es bei dem, was der moralischen Welt angehört, durchaus so, wenn wir die Worte Naturordnung, Naturvorgänge und moralische Ursachen ineinanderlaufend denken, daß dort in den höheren Welten moralische Qualitäten wirkliche Naturursachen auch sind und sich ausdrücken in den Formen, in den Vorgängen dieser übersinnlichen Welten. Damit kein Mißverständnis entsteht, möchte ich noch ausdrücklich bemerken, daß die Ausbildung der höheren Organismen des Menschen, der höheren Leiber, wenn wir so sagen dürfen, des elementarischen, des astralischen Leibes, in ihrer Vollkommenheit oder Unvollkommenheit nichts zu tun haben braucht mit der vollkommenen oder unvollkommenen Ausbildung des physischen Leibes. Der Mensch kann, selbst von Geburt an, irgendein physisches Organ verkrüppelt ausgebildet haben, und das entsprechende ätherische Organ kann nicht nur dann ganz normal ausgebildet sein, sondern sogar unter Umständen vollkommener, in sich vollendeter ausgebildet sein, wenn das entsprechende physische Organ verkümmert oder verkrüppelt ist. Was also ganz und gar nicht anwendbar wäre für das Sinnensein, daß die moralischen Qualitäten ihren getreuen Ausdruck finden in den Formen des physischen Leibes, das ist ganz und gar der Fall für das, was auch schon vom Menschen den übersinnlichen Welten angehört.
So sehen wir, daß das, was für das Sinnensein gleichsam nebeneinander hergeht - Naturordnung und moralische Ordnung -, verwoben ist für die übersinnlichen Welten, so daß wir, wenn wir von einem elementarischen Leibesglied sprechen, gar wohl sagen können: diese oder jene Form ist bewirkt durch Haß. Der Haß drückt sich anders aus in dem betreffenden elementarischen Leibesglied als die Liebe. Das hat durchaus Sinn, ein solches Wort für die übersinnlichen Welten zu gebrauchen; das hat keinen Sinn, wenn man bei einer bloßen Naturerklärung in dem Sinnensein verbleiben will. Charakteristisch tritt uns diese Notwendigkeit der Begriffswandlung für die höheren Welten besonders zum Beispiel für das entgegen, was man im gewöhnlichen Sinnensein, im gewöhnlichen Leben zu den Begierden, zu den Wünschen rechnet. Wie treten im Sinnensein die Begierden, die Wünsche, die Emotionen auf? Sie treten so auf, daß wir sie gleichsam aus dem Innern des menschlichen Seelenwesens hervorgehen sehen. Wenn wir in einem Menschen eine besondere Begierde erregt finden, so erkennen wir daraus, wie sein Inneres gestimmt ist, wie dieses Innere aus sich diese Begierde heraustreibt, und daß vor allem das Seeleninnere maßgebend ist für die Artung von Begierden, die dieser Mensch hat. Denn wir wissen sehr wohl, daß zum Beispiel gegenüber einem Stück Kalbfleisch der eine Mensch ganz andere Begierden entwickelt als der andere; das hängt nicht von dem Kalbfleisch ab, sondern von dem, was der Mensch im Sinnensein in seinem Innern hat. Gegenüber einer Raffaelischen Madonna kann der eine Mensch vollständig kalt bleiben, während der andere eine ganze Welt von Gefühlen erlebt. Wir können daher sagen: im Innern des Menschen entzündet sich seine Begierdenwelt.
Das wird anders, wenn wir die übersinnlichen Welten betreten. Was man für diese Welten Wünsche, Begierden, Emotionen nennen kann - es wäre nur ein leeres Geschwätz, zu sagen, daß man davon in diesen Welten nicht reden könne, denn Wünsche, Begierden und so weiter sind dort vorhanden -, das wird in der überwiegendsten Mehrzahl der Fälle immer durch Äußeres bewirkt, durch das, was das Wesen wirklich sieht, was es schaut. Daher liegt dem Hellseher in den übersinnlichen Welten viel weniger nahe dieses Hinblicken auf das Innere des Wesens, das er vor sich hat, um dessen Wünsche, Begierden und so weiter anzuschauen, sondern er wird die Umgebung dieses Wesens in der übersinnlichen Welt betrachten. Wenn er also sieht: da ist ein Wesen in der übersinnlichen Welt, und das hat Wünsche, Begierden, Emotionen - dann sieht er nicht so wie hier in der physischen Welt auf das Wesen selbst hin, sondern er sieht sich die Umgebung an; er untersucht: welche anderen Wesen halten sich dort in der Umgebung dieses Wesens auf? Und er wird immer sehen, daß je nachdem, was dort für Wesen in der Umgebung sind, auch die Begehrungen, die Wünsche, die Emotionen des Wesens sein werden, das da ist. Immer werden durch Äußeres ausgelöst die Wünsche, Begierden, Emotionen. Wie sich das macht, das kann Ihnen an einem Falle ganz besonders einleuchtend sein.
Nehmen wir an, ein Mensch komme in die übersinnlichen Welten hinein, entweder indem er die ersten Stufen der Initiation durchmacht und dadurch in die höheren Welten eindringt, oder indem er durch die Pforte des Todes geht und auf diese Weise in die höheren Welten hineinkommt. Der Hellseher beobachtet ihn nun in den übersinnlichen Welten. Nehmen wir an, dieser Mensch hätte aus der Sinneswelt, weil das zu seinen Eigenschaften gehört, irgendeine Unvollkommenheit mitgenommen, irgend etwas, was er nicht kann, oder eine moralische Unvollkommenheit oder irgend etwas, was er verbrochen hat in der physischen Welt und was nun eine zehrende Erinnerung ist in den übersinnlichen Welten. Um dies zu suchen, kommt es für den Hellseher nicht so sehr darauf an, in das Seeleninnere dieses Menschen jetzt hineinzublicken, sondern die Umgebung anzuschauen. Warum? Weil ein solcher Seeleninhalt, ein solches Eigenschaftliches in der Seele, das man als eine Unvollkommenheit, als einen moralischen Defekt mitgenommen hat, etwas Reales, etwas Wirkliches bewirkt. Das leitet den Menschen, führt ihn, bringt ihn hin an einen gewissen Ort der übersinnlichen Welt. An welchen Ort? An den Ort, wo ein Wesen ist, welches in vollkommenem Zustande das hat, was man, wenn man dort ankommt, in unvollkommenem Zustande hat. Dieser moralische Defekt, dieses Bewußtsein von einer mangelnden Fähigkeit bewirkt also etwas Wirkliches, geleitet einen auf einen Weg, stellt einen zu einem Wesen, welches das in vollkommener Weise hat, was man selbst unvollkommen hat, worauf es gerade ankommt. Und nun ist man verurteilt, indem dieses Wesen einem gegenübergestellt ist, es fortwährend anzuschauen. Man kommt in den übersinnlichen Welten durch reale Vorgänge - nicht durch das, was man im Sinnensein Begierden nennt - in die Nähe von Wesenheiten, die alles das haben, was man nicht hat, die einem fortwährend zeigen, was einem fehlt. Schaut also der Hellseher dorthin, was da für Wesen sind in der Umgebung eines Menschen, so weiß er aus der objektiven Beobachtung, was dem Menschen fehlt, was ihm mangelt. Was man verurteilt ist fortwährend anzuschauen, in wessen Nähe man kommt, das steht, kann man sagen, als ein fortwährender Vorwurf da. Und dieser Vorwurf, der also draußen steht, bewirkt, daß in dem Wesen das entsteht, was man in den übersinnlichen Welten als eine Begierde bezeichnen könnte, als der Wunsch, anders zu werden, und was die Tätigkeit, die Kraft erzeugt, sich wirklich so durchzuarbeiten, daß man die Unvollkommenheit, den Fehler ablegt. Sagen Sie nicht, dann müßten ja die übersinnlichen Welten für alles, was wir fehlerhaft haben, das vollkommene Wesen zeigen. Diese übersinnliche Welt ist wirklich so reich, daß sie uns für alle unsere Fehler die vollkommenen Wesen gegenüberstellen kann, ist viel reicher, als man es sich nach dem Sinnensein denkt. Oh, diese Welt ist schon so, daß sie den Menschen hinstellen kann vor irgendein Wesen, welches das in Vollkommenheit hat, was er selber in Unvollkommenheit hat. Das gibt einen Begriff, wie Wünsche, Begierden reale Kräfte sind, die unsere Wege bewirken in den übersinnlichen Welten, nicht als ob wir wie mit etwas Objektivem in unseren Wünschen dastehen und stehenbleiben können, sondern je nachdem wie wir sind, werden wir unseren Weg geführt und dort hingestellt, wo das, was wir nicht haben, uns als ein Reales oder als ein wirklicher Vorwurf entgegenscheint.
Man könnte sehr leicht sagen: wenn das so ist, so wäre der Mensch in den übersinnlichen Welten völlig unfrei, denn dann stände er der Außenwelt gegenüber und müßte an sich so arbeiten, wie es die Außenwelt bewirkt. Wenn man aber in den übersinnlichen Welten beobachtet, dann stellt sich heraus: das eine Wesen empfindet den Vorwurf und beginnt zu arbeiten, so daß es sich der Vollkommenheit entgegenarbeitet; das andere Wesen aber läßt das bleiben, wehrt sich, etwas nachzuahmen, was ihm als Vorwurf vorgestellt ist. Dieses Wehren aber bewirkt in den übersinnlichen Welten etwas ganz anderes als im Sinnensein. Wenn sich ein Wesen wehrt, diese Nachfolge wirklich zu leisten, so wird es wieder hinweggedrängt und hingedrängt in ganz andere Welten, die ihm ungewohnt sind, in denen es sich nicht auskennt, wofür ihm die Lebensbedingungen fehlen; das heißt, es verurteilt sich ein solches Wesen zu einer Art Zerstörungsprozeß in sich selber. Man kann durchaus wählen zwischen dem Fruchtbaren, Fördernden, das einem gezeigt wird, und sich selber ihm entsprechend verhalten, oder man kann sich durchimpfen mit zerstörenden Kräften, wenn man sich ihm widersetzt. Freiheit hat man. Aber die Durcheinanderwirkung des Moralischen und dessen, was im übersinnlichen Raume vorgeht, findet durchaus statt.
Ein weiteres Beispiel für so etwas ist, daß unsere Begriffe von schön und häßlich, wie wir sie mit vollem Rechte für die Sinneswelt haben, eigentlich nicht mehr angewendet werden können, sobald wir in die übersinnlichen Welten hiinaufkommen, und zwar aus mehrfachen Gründen. Wenn wir in den übersinnlichen Welten wahrnehmen, so erblicken wir zunächst einen bedeutsamen Unterschied in bezug auf die Wesen, die uns dort entgegentreten. Von dem einen wird man - vermöge der intuitiven Erkenntnis, die man da haben kann - sagen können: Dieses Wesen, das du da anschaust, ist imstande, hat den Willen, alles, was es in sich hat, wirklich auch äußerlich in seiner äußeren Erscheinung darzuleben. Nehmen wir an, ein solches Wesen habe einen elementarischen Lichtleib, es gehöre zu den Wesen, die sich nicht in der Sinneswelt verkörpern, sondern nur in den höheren Welten einen Lichtleib annehmen oder dergleichen. Dieser Lichtleib kann der Ausdruck dessen sein, was es in seinem Innern ist. Es ist nicht wie ein Mensch im Sinnensein, der uns entgegentritt in einer bestimmten Form und der die mannigfaltigsten Gefühle, Empfindungen und so weiter in sich verbergen kann,'so daß er sagen kann: Meine Gefühle sind für mich; was sich im Äußeren zeigt, das ist meine Naturgestalt; ich kann wohl das, was sich in meiner Seele zeigt, verbergen. So ist es für gewisse Wesen der übersinnlichen Welt nicht, sie zeigen in ihrer Gestalt den unmittelbarsten Ausdruck dessen, was sie in sich tragen. In den Ingredienzien liegt offen zutage, was sie im Innern sind. Andere Wesen gibt es, welche das nicht können, ihr eigentliches Innere unmittelbar in ihrer äußeren übersinnlichen Erscheinung zur Darstellung, zur Offenbarung zu bringen. Diesen Wesen gegenüber hat das hellseherische Bewußtsein das Gefühl von etwas Abstoßendem, von etwas, wovon es weg möchte, von etwas, was preßt, was sogar recht widerwärtig sein kann. So kann man zweierlei Wesenheiten unterscheiden: solche, die voll Willens sind, ihr Inneres - wenn ich den Ausdruck gebrauchen darf - zur Schau zu tragen, das Innere darzuleben, und solche Wesen, denen gegenüber man das Gefühl hat: was sie zur Schau tragen, das ist recht verkrüppelt, denn was in ihnen sitzt, ist verborgen, das tritt nicht heraus. Beim Sinnensein des Menschen kann man nicht in demselben Grade sagen, wenn einer etwas verbergen kann und wenn sich dem anderen gleich alles auf die Lippen drängt: sie unterscheiden sich naturgemäß. Sie unterscheiden sich in ihrem Antlitz, aber nicht naturgemäß. Für die übersinnlichen Welten sind das zwei radikal andere Klassen von Wesenheiten: die einen, welche alles offenbaren, was sie in ihrem Innern haben, und ihnen gegenüber diejenigen, welche dies nicht offenbaren können. Wenn wir die Bezeichnung schön und häßlich gebrauchen wollen ungefähr mit dem Ausdruck, den wir in der Sinneswelt haben, so müssen wir sie für diese zwei Klassen von Wesenheiten gebrauchen. Man kommt in den übersinnlichen Welten nur dadurch zu Rande, daß man die Wesenheiten, welche alles offenbaren, schön nennen kann, denn man empfindet ihnen gegenüber ebenso wie einem schönen Bilde gegenüber. Und wie etwas Häßliches empfindet man die Wesen, welche das Innere nicht in dem Äußeren offenbaren. Schön und häßlich hängt, wenn man den Ausdruck gebrauchen darf, mit der Naturgrundlage dieser Wesenheiten zusammen. Was hat das zur Folge?
Wenn das hellseherische Bewußtsein in eine Welt eintritt, wo es so gegenüber Schön und Häßlich empfinden muß, so muß es überhaupt vieles in seiner ganzen Empfindungsart ändern. Es ist dem Hellseher ganz natürlich, zu sagen, ein Wesen, welches alles, was es innen hat, offenbart, sei schön. Aber unmittelbar drängt sich dazu die andere Vorstellung: damit es schön sein kann, muß es aufrichtig, ehrlich sein! Es ist schön, weil es nichts verbirgt, weil es auf dem Antlitz trägt, was es in sich hat. Wahr und schön ist dasselbe, wenn man in die übersinnlichen Welten kommt. Und ein Wesen, das nicht sein Inneres offenbart, ist häßlich; das empfindet man unmittelbar im hellseherischen Bewußtsein. Aber man empfindet noch etwas anderes: es lügt einen an, es zeigt nicht, was es zeigen sollte! Das Häßliche ist zugleich das Lügnerische! Das Wahre, Aufrichtige und Ehrliche ist zugleich das Schöne, und das Häßliche das Lügnerische. Und man kommt in den übersinnlichen Welten dazu, daß die Trennung der Begriffe wahr und schön auf der einen Seite und häßlich und lügnerisch auf der anderen Seite jeden Sinn verliert. So muß man einem Wesen gegenüber den Ausdruck schön gebrauchen, wenn man die Empfindung hat: da ist etwas aufrichtig zu einem; und hat man die gegenteilige Empfindung, so muß man es häßlich nennen.
Daraus sieht man, wie die moralischen und die ästhetischen Begriffe eine Verbindung eingehen, wenn man in die höheren Welten hinaufgelangt. Das ist überhaupt das Eigentümliche des Hinaufrükkens in dieübersinnlichen Welten, daß die Begriffe zusammengehen, daß in bezug auf das, was in der physisch-sinnlichen Welt getrennt bezeichnet werden muß, Verschmelzungen, Zusammenfügungen entstehen. Daher muß man sich andere Empfindungsweisen aneignen, wenn man Bezeichnungen der Sinneswelt für übersinnliche Wesenheiten gebraucht. Man ist fast immer genötigt, diese Dinge noch einfacher und noch mehr dem sinnlichen Bewußtsein genähert darzustellen, als es eigentlich einer vollständig richtigen Darstellung entsprechen kann, denn die Dinge komplizieren sich sehr. Wenn ich eben ausgeführt habe, wie sich die Begriffe von wahr, aufrichtig und schön auf der einen Seite und von häßlich und lügnerisch auf der anderen Seite verknüpfen, so müssen wir noch etwas anderes hinzufügen.
Wenn man in die übersinnlichen Welten eindringt, kann man ein Wesen finden, welches man nach allen Begriffen, die man sich im Sinnensein angeeignet hat, als ein schönes Wesen bezeichnen muß, als ein herrliches Wesen vielleicht: schön, strahlend, herrlich. Nun hat man es vor sich. Es ist aber kein Beweis, daß es auch ein gutes Wesen ist, wenn es einem so entgegentritt, es kann ein ganz böses sein und einem in der hehrsten Engelsgestalt entgegentreten. Denn nach dem Begriffe von schön, den man sich in der Sinneswelt gebildet hat, nennt man ein solches Wesen in der übersinnlichen Anschauung schön. Wie sollte man es auch nicht! Wenn man es abgebildet finden würde in der Sinneswelt, würde man es mit vollem Rechte schön nennen. Ein solches Wesen kann das häßlichste sein, das es nur gibt; trotzdem kann es als ein schönes bezeichnet werden, wenn man bei den Bezeichnungen der Sinneswelt bleibt. Es kann ein ganz böses Wesen sein, kann die Bosheit und die Schlechtigkeit und die Unwahrheit, die einen anlügt, behalten, kann ein Teufel in Engelsgestalt sein. Das ist durchaus möglich in den übersinnlichen Welten. Nun kann sich durch mancherlei Weise, wovon wir noch sprechen werden, herausstellen, daß man nach und nach hinter die Sache kommt, wenn man sich mit dem hellseherischen Bewußtsein der Sache gegenüberstellt. Man hat also vor sich eine Engelsgestalt und kann sich jetzt sagen, wenn man es so weit gebracht hat, denkend bleiben zu können beim übersinnlichen Anschauen: Daß du jetzt einen Engel siehst oder irgendeine herrliche Gestalt, dadurch mußt du dich nicht täuschen lassen; das kann alles möglich sein, es kann ein Engel sein, kann aber auch ein Teufel sein. Nun kann man anfangen mit dem, was man so oft tun muß, wenn man hinaufrückt in die höheren Welten: mit einer gehörigen Selbstprüfung. Man kann mit sich zu Rate gehen und untersuchen, wieviel Eigenschaften von Selbstsinn, von Egoismus man in sich hat. Dann durchdringt sich die Seele mit mancherlei Bitternissen, dann kommt mancherlei Wermut in die Seele hinein. Aber dieses Bittere, Peinigende kann gerade dazu führen, daß man sich wieder eine kurze Zeit reinigt, daß man sich läutert in seinem Selbstsinn, in seinem Egoismus. Und wenn man dadurch zu dem Urteil kommt, wie wenig man eigentlich frei ist von dem Selbstsinn und daß man danach streben muß, frei zu werden, dann erleuchtet sich einem der ganze Prozeß, der sich abspielt im Seeleninnern. Wenn man es nun so weit gebracht hat, daß einem, wenn man solche Selbstbetrachtung anstellt, das nicht entfällt, was man anschaut - denn das wird in der Regel bei den ersten Schritten geschehen -, so fängt unter Umständen der Engel an, gar kein Engel zu sein, sondern recht häßliche Formen anzunehmen, und man kann nach und nach dahinterkommen, daß man sich sagt: Dem Wesen, dem du da als einem bösen entgegengetreten bist, hast du die Möglichkeit gegeben, seine Bösartigkeit zum Ausdruck zu bringen, indem es dir erst eine ganz andere Gestalt vorgaukelte; aber du hast es gezwungen, dir seine wahre Gestalt zu zeigen, indem du dich mit reineren Gefühlen durchdrungen hast.
So hat ein seelischer Vorgang in der übersinnlichen Welt ein Zwingendes, ein Kraftendes; so macht man es selber den Wesen möglich, einen anzulügen, oder man zwingt sie, einem ihre wahre Gestalt darzustellen. Wie man hineintritt in die übersinnliche Welt, mit welchen Qualitäten, danach stellt sie sich einem dar. Was man die Quelle der Täuschungen nennt, damit muß man noch ganz anders vorgehen, als es gewöhnlich geschieht. Es kann jemand in die übersinnlichen Welten hineintreten und allerlei Herrliches beschreiben. Wenn Sie ihm sagen, er hätte sich getäuscht, so wäre das nicht wahr; denn er hat es gesehen. Aber er hat nicht das gesehen, was er gesehen haben würde, wenn er das getan hätte, was ich eben beschrieben habe. Hätte er es so gemacht, so hätte er zugleich die Wahrheit gesehen. Denn von einem Teufel ist es schön, wenn er sich als Teufel darstellt, während es häßlich ist, wenn er eine Engelsgestalt darstellt. Man kann gar nicht anders als solche Begriffe sich anzueignen. So muß man sich vor allen Dingen abgewöhnen, wenn man in die übersinnlichen Welten hineintritt, die Dinge mit den Vorstellungen zu bezeichnen, die man gewonnen hat in der sinnlichen Welt. Wenn man dies, was man im Sinnensein gewonnen hat, beibehielte, so würde man erst zu der Gestalt, die einem so entgegentritt, sagen: Es ist ein schöner Engel -, und nachher: Es ist ein häßlicher Teufel! - So kann es aber das hellseherische Bewußtsein nicht ausdrücken, wenn man richtig charakterisieren will, sondern zu dem häßlichen Teufel muß man sagen: Es ist ein schöner Teufel -, trotzdem er nach sinnlichen Begriffen grundhäßlich ist. Dazu kommt man aber nicht dadurch, daß man einfach alle Begriffe auf den Kopf stellt, die man aus dem Sinnensein hat. Das wäre ein bequemer Weg. Dann könnte jemand zum Beispiel den Devachanplan dadurch beschreiben, daß er für alles, was in der Sinneswelt häßlich ist, schön setzt, für schön häßlich, für grün rot, für schwarz weiß und so weiter. So kann man es aber nicht machen, sondern die Begriffe müssen angeeignet sein im Erleben der übersinnlichen Welten. Man eignet sie sich so an wie die Anschauungen, die das heranreifende Kind von der Sinneswelt sich aneignet, nicht durch Theorien, sondern durch Erleben, und findet es dann völlig unnatürlich, einen Teufel häßlich zu nennen, der sich als Teufel darstellt, wenn man sich bewußt ist, daß man die Sprache der übersinnlichen Welten redet. Aber man muß sich eine solche Empfindungsweise aneignen, wenn man sich wirklich in den übersinnlichen Welten orientieren will, wenn man in ihnen sich auskennen und herumgehen will. Daher können Sie sich nun leicht eine Vorstellung machen, was gemeint ist, wenn man der Einfachheit halber sagt: Auf der einen Seite steht die Sinneswelt, auf der anderen Seite sind die übersinnlichen Welten; da kommt man aus dem Sinnensein über die entsprechende Grenze in das übersinnliche Sein hinein. Geht man mit alledem, was man im Sinnensein gewonnen hat, da hinein, wendet man das an, was man gewonnen hat an Vorstellungen, Begriffen, Ideen aus der Sinneswelt, so ist alles unzutreffend; dann redet man lauter Verkehrtheiten. Man muß gründlich an der Grenze umlernen und zwar nicht theoretisch, sondern lebendig. Man kann das überhaupt nicht brauchen, was man sich in der Sinneswelt an Vorstellungen angeeignet hat, man muß es zurücklassen. Sie sehen, daß man vieles zurücklassen muß, womit man recht innig verbunden ist in der Welt des Sinnenseins, und ich möchte Ihnen jetzt die Sache konkret-anschaulich, nicht aus Theorien heraus beschreiben.
Nehmen wir an, jemand gelangt, nachdem er sich die Fähigkeit angeeignet hat, die gekennzeichnete Grenze zu überschreiten, von der Sinneswelt in die übersinnliche Welt hinein. An der Grenze früge er sich: Was muß ich jetzt zurücklassen, wenn ich mich auskennen will in der übersinnlichen Welt? Ich muß zurücklassen - so kann er sich bei guter Selbstbesinnung sagen - eigentlich alles, was ich in den verschiedenen Inkarnationen vom Erdenurbeginn an bis in die Jetztzeit auf der Erde erlebt, gelernt, mir angeeignet habe. Das muß ich hier ablegen, denn ich betrete eine Welt, in welcher das, was man innerhalb der Inkarnationen lernen kann, keinen Sinn mehr hat. Es ist leicht, möchte ich sagen, so etwas auszusprechen; es ist leicht, so etwas anzuhören; es ist leicht, das in Begriffsabstraktionen zu fassen. Aber es ist eine ganze innere Welt, so etwas zu empfinden, zu fühlen, zu erleben: alles dort abzulegen wie die Kleider, was man in all den Inkarnationen in dem Sinnensein sich angeeignet hat, um in eine Welt hineinzugehen, innerhalb welcher das alles keinen Sinn mehr hat. Hat man diese Empfindung lebendig, dann hat man auch eine lebendige Erfahrung - wirklich nichts, was mit irgendeiner Theorie zusammenhängt -, wie man sie hat, wenn man in der wirklichen Welt eben einem wirklichen Menschen gegenüberrtritt, den man kennenlernt, indem er zu einem spricht, sich zu einem verhält, den man nicht kennenlernt, indem man sich von ihm Begriffe konstruiert, sondern indem er mit einem lebt. So steht man an der Grenze zwischen Sinnensein und Geistessein nicht einem Begriffssystem, sondern einer Realität gegenüber, die nur als eine übersinnliche Realität wirkt, aber so konkret, so lebendig wie ein Mensch: das ist der Hüter der Schwelle. Er ist da als ein konkretes, reales Wesen. Und lernt man ihn kennen, so lernt man ihn auch kennen als ein Wesen, das in die Kategorie von Wesen gehört, die in einer gewissen Weise mitgemacht haben das Leben vom Erdenurbeginn, dann aber nicht dasjenige mitgemacht haben, was man als Seelenwesen erlebt. Das ist das Wesen, das in dem Mysteriendrama «Der Hüter der Schwelle» dramatisiert werden sollte mit den Worten:
Bekannt ist dir, der dieses Reiches Schwelle
Behüten muß seit Erdenurbeginn,
Was, um es zu betreten, Wesen brauchen,
Die deiner Zeit und deiner Art gehören.
Dieses «deiner Zeit und deiner Art» ist etwas, was aus dem Wesen der Sache heraus folgt. Andere Zeiten und andere Art haben die Menschen - andere Art und andere Zeiten haben die Wesen, die in einer gewissen Weise getrennt gegangen sind von den Wegen der Menschheit seit dem Erdenurbeginn. Da kommen wir mit einem Wesen zusammen, demgegenüber man sich sagt: Ich habe ein Wesen vor mir, das erfährt und erlebt vieles in der Welt; aber es beschäftigt sich nicht mit dem, was man an Liebe, an Schmerzen und Pein, aber auch an Fehlern und Unmoralischem auf der Erde erleben kann; es weiß nichts und will nichts wissen von dem, was sich abgespielt hat in der menschlichen Grundwesenheit bis jetzt. Die christliche Überlieferung drückt diesen Tatbestand dadurch aus, daß sie sagt: Vor dem Geheimnis der Menschwerdung verhüllten diese Wesenheiten ihr Antlitz. Eine ganze Welt ist in dem Unterschiede zwischen diesen Wesenheiten und den menschlichen Wesenheiten ausgedrückt.
Und nun kommt eine Empfindung, die man unmittelbar hat, die sich so einstellt, wie wenn man einem Menschen gegenüber, der blonde Haare hat, die unmittelbare Empfindung hat: der hat blonde Haare. So tritt die Empfindung auf: Dadurch, daß du durch die Erdenkulturen durchgegangen bist, hast du dir notwendigerweise Unvollkommenheiten angeeignet, aber du mußt wieder zurückkommen zu dem ursprünglichen Zustand, mußt auf der Erde den Weg wieder zurückfinden, und dieses Wesen kann dir das zeigen, weil es deine Fehler nicht angenommen hat. Jetzt steht man einem Wesen gegenüber wie einem wirklichen Vorwurf, groß und grandios, wie ein Ansporn zu dem, was man nicht ist. Das zeigt einem dieses Wesen in lebendigster Weise, und da kann man sich ganz ausgefüllt fühlen vor dem Wesen von dem Wissen dessen, was man ist oder nicht ist. Da steht man dem lebendigen Vorwurf gegenüber. In die Klasse der Erzengel, der Archangeloi, wie wir sagen, gehört dieses Wesen. Es ist eine ganz reale Begegnung, und sie veranlaßt, daß einem plötzlich vor Augen tritt, was man als Erdenmensch im Sinnensein geworden ist. Selbsterkenntnis ist es zugleich im wahrhaftigen, umfassendsten Sinne. Sich selbst schaut man, wie man ist, und sich selbst schaut man, wie man nun werden soll!
Zu diesem Schauen ist der Mensch nicht immer geeignet. Ich habe heute nur von der Begriffs- und Vorstellungswelt gesprochen, die abgelegt werden muß. Vieles andere muß ebenso abgelegt werden. Man muß, wenn man bis zum Hüter der Schwelle hinkommt, eigentlich alles ablegen, was man von sich weiß. Man muß nur dann noch etwas haben, um es durchzubringen. Darauf kommt es an! Daß man an der Grenze alles zurücklassen muß, das bewirkt ein inneres Erlebnis, dem man eben gewachsen sein muß, und die Vorbereitung bis zu dieser Stufe der Hellsichtigkeit muß darin bestehen und besteht bei einer richtigen Schulung darin - bei einer richtigen Schulung darf man nicht von Gefahren sprechen, denn gerade eine richtige Schulung beseitigt die Gefahren -, daß man ertragen lernt, was sonst schauervoll, schreckensvoll wäre. Zum Ertragen muß man kommen durch die Vorbereitung, denn das ist die Grundkraft zu allem weiteren Erleben. Im gewöhnlichen Leben ist der Mensch nicht fähig, alles das zu ertragen, was man ertragen muß, wenn man vor dem Hüter der Schwelle steht. Denn der Hüter der Schwelle ist zu etwas höchst Sonderbarem genötigt, das beurteilt werden muß von dem Gesichtspunkt der übersinnlichen Welt, wenn es nicht mißverstanden werden soll. Der Mensch ist immer so, daß sich die Tätigkeiten der übersinnlichen Welt in ihm abspielen; er weiß nur nichts davon. Während wir denken, empfinden, wollen, läuft immer eine Tätigkeit des astralischen Leibes und ein Zusammenhang mit der astralen Welt nebenher. Aber der Mensch weiß nichts davon, weil er, wenn er das wissen würde, was seine eigenen Leiber sind, es nicht ertragen könnte und davon betäubt würde. Daher muß diese Wesenheit, wenn ihr der Mensch ohne genügende Vorbereitung gegenübertritt, ihm das alles verhüllen und sich selber verhüllen; sie muß einen Schleier ziehen vor die übersinnliche Welt. Sie muß es tun zum Schutze des Menschen, der, im Sinnensein stehend, den Anblick nicht ertragen könnte. Da sehen wir so recht einen Begriff, den wir im Sinnensein nur moralisch beurteilen können, als unmittelbarste Naturordnung. Der Schutz des Menschen vor dem Sehen der übersinnlichen Welt ist die Funktion des Hüters der Schwelle, die Erhaltung des Menschen in dem Zustande, in dem er ist, bevor er sich in genügender Weise auf die übersinnlichen Welten vorbereitet hat.
So haben wir versucht, einige Vorstellungen zusammenzufügen, die uns hinführen können zu einem Begriff von dem Hüter der Schwelle. Solche Vorstellungen, solche Begriffe und Ideen, Erfahrungen und Erlebnisse versuchte ich in einem kleinen Buche zusammenzustellen, das in den nächsten Tagen Ihnen hier noch dargeboten werden soll und das Ihnen neben den Vorträgen selbst eine wichtige Hilfe sein kann. Es wird in eine Reihe von acht Meditationen zerfallen und wird sich so darstellen, daß der Leser, wenn er diese Meditationen durchmacht, dadurch für sein Seelenleben etwas haben wird. Einige von den Vorstellungen, die uns zum Hüter der Schwelle hinführen können, versuchte ich heute zu charakterisieren. Von diesem ausgehend werden wir versuchen, an dem Hüter der Schwelle vorbeigehend, einige Einblicke und Ausblicke zu charakterisieren, um dann noch tiefer die Christus-Wesenheit und die Christus-Initiation verstehen zu können.
Third Lecture
If we want to talk about initiation and its significance for the whole of human life and for human development, we must try to penetrate into the essence of what this actually is, using those concepts and ideas that are necessary in order to characterize the supersensible worlds in a correct manner. It is understandable that at every stage of its development, the human soul has a deepest longing to learn something about what it is like in those worlds that can, in a more or less justified way, be described as eternal. It must therefore also be understandable that human souls strive to penetrate these higher worlds without much preparation, using only the ideas and concepts they have in their sense consciousness. I say expressly: this is understandable. And this can also be accommodated in a certain way when it comes to satisfying the longing for eternity in this or that religious creed. But when it is a matter, in a truly theosophical sense, of penetrating more deeply into the original source of all spiritual life, and thus into the original source of all soul life, then one must—at least gradually—become reconciled to the necessity of transforming one's ideas and concepts in a certain way before one can form correct ideas of the higher, supersensible worlds. Because this is particularly necessary for the characterization of the actual Christ appearance, as we will see in the next lectures, allow me today to say a few words about the necessary transformation and reshaping of the human imagination if human beings want to ascend to ideas about the supersensible worlds.
We must first familiarize ourselves with the fact that everything in the supersensible worlds is different from what we experience in our senses, for nowhere in the universe is there an exact repetition of world existence. If everything is different, why should we assume that human ideas and concepts are just as valid for the higher worlds as they are for our sensory experience? They are not. Anyone who truly accomplishes the practical ascent into those worlds that initiation opens up, that is, anyone who has experience in supersensible perception, knows, as we will hear in a moment, that they must not only change many other things about themselves—I could even say here that they must leave many of their habits, conceptions, and ideas behind with the guardian of the threshold—but that they must also leave behind many of their habits, conceptions, and ideas before they can enter the supersensible, higher worlds. leave behind with the guardian of the threshold, but also must lay down many of his habits, concepts, ideas, and notions before he can enter the supersensible, higher worlds.
Above all, let us start from certain ideas that must dominate us all in our sense life. I would say that two pairs of concepts, two systems of concepts, are particularly decisive here. They stand side by side in our sense life, running parallel to each other. One is everything we imagine about the natural world, about the laws of nature, the forces of nature. Alongside all the ideas we form about this, our ordinary life in the world of the senses is governed by what we call the moral world order, the sum of our moral concepts, notions, and ideas. Through proper self-reflection, human beings will very soon realize that they must distinguish between these two conceptual systems—the natural order and the moral world order—in their sensory experience. When we explain a plant—let us assume we have a poisonous plant before us—we explain it in terms of natural forces, in terms of the laws of nature. And I would like to say that we do not spoil our explanation of the plant by holding the plant morally responsible for being a poisonous plant. We believe that healthy thinking within the realm of sensory experience requires us to first emancipate ourselves from what we call moral concepts and ideas when explaining natural existence. We know that we ourselves must still practice this kind of emancipation if we want to arrive at unbiased, objective ideas about the animal kingdom. We feel and believe that it would make no sense to hold the lion responsible for its cruelty in the same way that we hold a human being responsible for his cruelty. And if many of today's explainers of nature find something like moral concepts in the animal kingdom, I would say more out of taste than out of a genuine necessity, then that may be justified in a certain sense. But one can only speak of an echo of moral ideas in what animals do, in what happens in the animal kingdom. If we want to develop nature explanation purely, it requires an emancipation from moral ideas and concepts if we want our explanations to remain directly within the realm of the senses. But then, one might say, the moral world order enters our lives majestically, with unconditional, absolute demands—as unbiased self-observation and self-reflection would say. And we know that moral ideas are what determine the value of human beings; indeed, not only the value of human beings within human society, but in such a way that one can even say: Even those who must accuse themselves of immorality will, if they are or could be blessed with the ability to reflect calmly on themselves at a particular moment, determine their own value as human beings according to the moral concepts that shine into their consciousness. This must be emphasized again and again in order to distinguish these two systems of ideas from one another.
This becomes completely different at the moment when one enters the higher worlds, when one comes to perceive, observe, experience, and learn outside of one's physical body, and thereby enters higher supersensible worlds. At first, when one really begins to observe, one observes with that body of which I spoke a little yesterday: with the elementary or etheric body. Then one looks at the world—or rather, at a second supersensible world—with one's astral body. And the further one ascends into the higher worlds, the more the ideas and concepts that one has acquired in the ordinary physical world lose their meaning. They must be transformed so that we can correctly describe and understand what we encounter in the higher supersensible worlds. In the ordinary world of sensory perception, we have only one thing that can remind us of a fundamental fact known to every clairvoyant person: we speak in images, in symbols, so that words echo what will be experienced again in its reality, in its actuality, in the higher worlds. When someone uses the word “burn” in connection with avarice, envy, or hatred, there is actually something contained in such a word that belongs to those many wonderful mysteries of language creation, where that which in reality exists only in the higher worlds shines into the primitive, elementary human consciousness. For everyone knows that when they speak of burning hatred, they do not mean a burning as in the natural burning of a fire outside in the natural world; they know that they are speaking in a figurative sense, so to speak, and that it would be of no help to them if they tried to explain things and processes in nature by resorting to moral concepts. As soon as one speaks of processes in the higher worlds, one does not speak figuratively or in a metaphorical sense when one uses such expressions. I may remind you that twice in the drama “The Guardian of the Threshold” the expression is used that certain soul processes, feelings, desires “burn” in the higher worlds. This does not mean something like a symbol, but something completely real, actual, and truly spiritual. Lucifer, for example, would never say in the same sense that this or that burns him, as a human being in the sense of hatred might say that it burns him; but Lucifer would say it in a true, completely real sense. For what can be compared in the supersensible worlds with the natural order, with the natural processes of the sensory world, stands in these supersensible worlds in a much more intimate connection with what can in turn be called the moral worlds than these two series of ideas stand in relation to each other here in the sensory world.
We can immediately form a concept of these two ideas when we turn to the elementary body of the human being. As long as we remain with the physical body, we can say that a hand can be raised to commit a moral act. We see it with our sensory eyes and examine it with the science belonging to the sensory world in order to explain its functions. This explanation of the hand within the realm of the senses will not differ significantly whether we are dealing with a hand that is reaching out to commit a moral or an immoral act. Whatever the form of the hand, insofar as it can be explained within the realm of the senses, we must not allow ourselves to interfere with what we contribute to the explanation of the hand, whether this hand usually reaches out to perform moral or immoral acts. The situation is different with the elementary body of the human being. This elementary body, for example, any limb of it, appears to clairvoyant consciousness as imperfectly formed. And when we ask ourselves why this is the case with an organ of the elementary body, when we ask about the true causes, the reason for such imperfect formation appears to us to be, for example, some moral error, some moral deficiency, some moral imperfection of the human being. In the elementary body, the moral quality of the human being is indeed already expressed in a certain way. But it is expressed even more clearly and intensely in the astral body. So while it would be completely wrong to assume that any mutilation of a human being is the expression of something moral in him, it is certainly true of the moral world that if we think of the words natural order, natural processes, and moral causes as interrelated, that in the higher worlds moral qualities are also real natural causes and express themselves in the forms and processes of these supersensible worlds. To avoid any misunderstanding, I would like to expressly note that the development of the higher organisms of the human being, the higher bodies, if we may say so, the elemental and astral bodies, in their perfection or imperfection, need have nothing to do with the perfect or imperfect development of the physical body. Even from birth, a human being may have developed a physical organ in a crippled form, and the corresponding etheric organ may not only be developed quite normally, but may even, under certain circumstances, be developed more perfectly, more completely in itself, if the corresponding physical organ is atrophied or crippled. What would therefore be completely inapplicable to the sensory world, namely that moral qualities find their true expression in the forms of the physical body, is entirely the case for that which already belongs to the supersensible worlds of human beings.
Thus we see that what in sensory existence run parallel to each other—the natural order and the moral order—are interwoven in the supersensible worlds, so that when we speak of an elementary limb, we can well say: this or that form is caused by hatred. Hatred expresses itself differently in the elementary limb in question than love does. It makes perfect sense to use such a word for the supersensible worlds; it makes no sense if one wants to remain within the realm of the senses in a mere explanation of nature. This necessity of changing concepts for the higher worlds is particularly characteristic, for example, of what we consider to be desires and wishes in ordinary sensory perception, in ordinary life. How do desires, wishes, and emotions arise in sensory perception? They arise in such a way that we see them, as it were, emerging from within the human soul. When we find a particular desire aroused in a person, we recognize from this what their inner state is, how this inner state drives this desire out of itself, and that, above all, the inner soul is decisive for the nature of the desires that this person has. For we know very well that, for example, one person develops completely different desires for a piece of veal than another; this does not depend on the veal, but on what the person has within themselves in their sense life. One person may remain completely unmoved by a Raphael Madonna, while another experiences a whole world of feelings. We can therefore say that a person's world of desires is ignited within them.
This changes when we enter the supersensible worlds. What one might call desires, passions, emotions in these worlds—it would be mere empty talk to say that one cannot speak of such things in these worlds, for desires, passions, and so on do exist there—is in the vast majority of cases always caused by external factors, by what the being actually sees, what it looks at. Therefore, in the supersensible worlds, it is much less natural for the clairvoyant to look into the inner being of the being before him in order to see its desires, cravings, and so on. Instead, he will observe the surroundings of this being in the supersensible world. So when he sees that there is a being in the supersensible world who has desires, cravings, emotions, he does not look at the being itself as we do here in the physical world, but rather he looks at the surroundings; he investigates: What other beings are present in the surroundings of this being? And he will always see that, depending on what beings are in the environment, the desires, the wishes, and the emotions of the being that is there will also be the same. Desires, wishes, and emotions are always triggered by external factors. How this works can be made particularly clear to you with an example.
Let us assume that a person enters the supersensible worlds, either by going through the first stages of initiation and thereby entering the higher worlds, or by passing through the gate of death and thus entering the higher worlds. The clairvoyant now observes him in the supersensible worlds. Let us assume that this person has brought some imperfection with them from the sensory world, because it is part of their nature, something they cannot do, or a moral imperfection, or something they have done in the physical world and which is now a consuming memory in the supersensible worlds. In order to find this, it is not so important for the clairvoyant to look into the inner soul of this person, but rather to look at their surroundings. Why? Because such soul content, such a characteristic in the soul, which has been taken along as an imperfection, as a moral defect, has a real effect. This guides the person, leads them, brings them to a certain place in the supersensible world. To what place? To the place where there is a being who has in a perfect state what one has in an imperfect state when one arrives there. This moral defect, this awareness of a lack of ability, thus causes something real, guides one on a path, places one before a being who has in a perfect way what one oneself has imperfectly, what is precisely what matters. And now, being confronted with this being, one is condemned to look at it continually. In the supersensible worlds, through real processes—not through what we call desires in our sensory existence—we come into the vicinity of beings who have everything we lack, who constantly show us what we are missing. So when the clairvoyant looks at the beings that surround a person, he knows from objective observation what the person is lacking, what is missing. What one condemns must be constantly looked at; whatever one comes near, one might say, stands there as a constant reproach. And this reproach, which is thus present outside, causes something to arise in the being that could be described in the supersensible worlds as a desire, as the wish to become different, and which generates the activity, the power to really work through oneself in such a way that one casts off one's imperfection, one's fault. Do not say that the supersensible worlds would then have to show the perfect being for everything that is flawed in us. This supersensible world is truly so rich that it can present us with perfect beings for all our faults; it is much richer than one imagines based on the senses. Oh, this world is such that it can place human beings before some being that has in perfection what they themselves have in imperfection. This gives us an idea of how desires and cravings are real forces that determine our paths in the supersensible worlds, not as if we stand and remain in our desires as if they were something objective, but rather, depending on how we are, we are led along our path and placed where that which we lack appears to us as something real or as a real reproach.
One could very easily say: if this is so, then human beings would be completely unfree in the supersensible worlds, for then they would be confronted with the external world and would have to work on themselves in the way that the external world causes them to do. But when one observes in the supersensible worlds, one finds that one being feels the accusation and begins to work so that it works toward perfection; the other being, however, leaves it alone, resists imitating something that is presented to it as an accusation. But this resistance has a completely different effect in the supersensible worlds than it does in the sensory world. When a being resists truly following this path, it is pushed away and thrust into completely different worlds that are unfamiliar to it, in which it does not know its way around and lacks the conditions for life; that is, such a being condemns itself to a kind of process of destruction within itself. One can certainly choose between the fruitful, beneficial things that are shown to one and behave accordingly, or one can allow oneself to be infected by destructive forces if one resists them. One has freedom. But the interaction between morality and what goes on in the supersensible realm definitely takes place.
Another example of this is that our concepts of beautiful and ugly, which we rightly apply to the sensory world, can no longer be applied once we ascend to the supersensible worlds, and this is for several reasons. When we perceive in the supersensible worlds, we first notice a significant difference in the beings that we encounter there. Of one of them, we can say, based on the intuitive knowledge that we can have there: This being that you see is capable of, has the will to, truly express everything it has within itself in its outer appearance. Let us assume that such a being has an elementary light body, that it belongs to beings that do not incarnate in the sensory world, but only take on a light body or something similar in the higher worlds. This light body can be the expression of what it is inside. It is not like a human being in the sensory world who comes toward us in a certain form and can hide within himself the most diverse feelings, sensations, and so on, so that he can say: My feelings are mine; what shows itself outwardly is my natural form; I can hide what shows itself in my soul. This is not the case for certain beings of the supersensible world; they show in their form the most direct expression of what they carry within themselves. What they are inside is clearly evident in their ingredients. There are other beings who cannot do this, who cannot directly express or reveal their true inner nature in their outer, supersensible appearance. The clairvoyant consciousness has a feeling of repulsion toward these beings, a feeling of wanting to get away from them, a feeling of pressure that can even be quite unpleasant. Thus, two kinds of beings can be distinguished: those who are fully willing to display their inner nature, if I may use the expression, to live out their inner nature, and those beings towards whom one has the feeling that what they display is quite crippled, because what is within them is hidden and does not come out. In the case of human sentient beings, one cannot say to the same degree whether one person is capable of hiding something and another has everything rushing to their lips: they differ by nature. They differ in their appearance, but not by nature. For the supersensible worlds, these are two radically different classes of beings: those who reveal everything they have within themselves, and those who cannot reveal this. If we want to use the terms beautiful and ugly in approximately the same way as we do in the sensory world, we must use them for these two classes of beings. In the supersensible worlds, one can only get along by calling the beings that reveal everything beautiful, because one feels toward them as one does toward a beautiful picture. And one feels toward beings that do not reveal their inner nature in their outer appearance as one feels toward something ugly. Beautiful and ugly are connected, if one may use the expression, with the natural basis of these beings. What does this mean?
When clairvoyant consciousness enters a world where it has to feel this way about beauty and ugliness, it has to change a lot about how it feels. It is quite natural for the clairvoyant to say that a being that reveals everything it has inside is beautiful. But immediately the other idea arises: in order for it to be beautiful, it must be sincere and honest! It is beautiful because it hides nothing, because it wears on its face what it has within itself. Truth and beauty are the same thing when one enters the supersensible worlds. And a being that does not reveal its inner self is ugly; one senses this immediately in clairvoyant consciousness. But one senses something else as well: it lies to you, it does not show what it should show! The ugly is at the same time the deceitful! The true, sincere, and honest is at the same time the beautiful, and the ugly is the deceitful. And in the supersensible worlds, one comes to the conclusion that the separation of the concepts true and beautiful on the one hand and ugly and deceitful on the other loses all meaning. Thus, one must use the expression beautiful when one has the feeling that something is sincere toward one; and if one has the opposite feeling, one must call it ugly.
From this we see how moral and aesthetic concepts become connected when we ascend to higher worlds. This is the peculiarity of ascending into the supersensible worlds, that concepts merge, that fusions and combinations arise in relation to what must be designated separately in the physical-sensible world. Therefore, one must acquire other modes of perception when using terms from the sensory world to describe supersensible beings. One is almost always compelled to represent these things in an even simpler form and closer to sensory consciousness than is actually possible in a completely accurate representation, because things become very complicated. When I have just explained how the concepts of true, sincere, and beautiful on the one hand, and ugly and deceitful on the other, are linked, we must add something else.
When one enters the supersensible worlds, one can find a being which, according to all the concepts one has acquired in the sense life, must be described as a beautiful being, perhaps as a glorious being: beautiful, radiant, glorious. Now you have it before you. But it is no proof that it is also a good being when it appears to you in this way; it can be a very evil one and appear to you in the most sublime angelic form. For according to the concept of beauty that you have formed in the sensory world, you call such a being beautiful in supersensible perception. How could you not? If one were to find it depicted in the world of the senses, one would rightly call it beautiful. Such a being may be the ugliest that exists; nevertheless, it can be described as beautiful if one sticks to the designations of the world of the senses. It can be a completely evil being, can retain the malice and wickedness and untruthfulness that deceives you, can be a devil in the form of an angel. This is entirely possible in the supersensible worlds. Now, through various means, which we will discuss later, it can become apparent that one gradually gets to the bottom of things when one confronts them with clairvoyant consciousness. So you have an angelic form before you, and now you can say to yourself, if you have reached the point where you can remain thinking while viewing supersensible things: You must not allow yourself to be deceived by the fact that you now see an angel or some other glorious form; all of that is possible; it may be an angel, but it may also be a devil. Now one can begin with what one so often has to do when one ascends into the higher worlds: with a proper self-examination. One can consult with oneself and examine how much self-will, how much egoism one has in oneself. Then the soul becomes permeated with all kinds of bitterness, then all kinds of wormwood enter into the soul. But this bitterness and torment can lead to a brief period of purification, of cleansing oneself of self-will and egoism. And when one comes to the conclusion that one is actually very little free of self-will and that one must strive to become free, then the whole process taking place within the soul becomes clear. If you have now reached the point where, when you engage in such self-observation, what you see does not disappear—because that will usually happen in the first few steps—then, under certain circumstances, the angel may cease to be an angel at all and take on quite ugly forms, and you may gradually come to realize that you are saying to yourself: You have given the being you encountered as evil the opportunity to express its evil nature by first deceiving you with a completely different form; but you have forced it to show you its true form by filling yourself with purer feelings.
Thus, a spiritual process in the supersensible world has a compelling, powerful force; thus, one makes it possible for beings to lie to one, or one forces them to reveal their true form. How one enters the supersensible world, with what qualities, determines how it presents itself to one. What is called the source of illusions must be approached in a completely different way than is usually done. Someone may enter the supersensible worlds and describe all kinds of wonderful things. If you tell him he was mistaken, that would not be true, for he saw it. But he did not see what he would have seen if he had done what I have just described. Had he done so, he would have seen the truth at the same time. For it is beautiful for a devil to present himself as a devil, while it is ugly for him to present himself as an angel. One cannot help but adopt such concepts. So, above all, when entering the supersensible worlds, one must unlearn the habit of describing things with the concepts one has acquired in the sensory world. If one were to retain what one has gained in the sensory world, one would first say of the figure that appears before one: It is a beautiful angel — and afterwards: It is an ugly devil! But clairvoyant consciousness cannot express this correctly if one wants to characterize it properly. Instead, one must say of the ugly devil: “It is a beautiful devil,” even though it is fundamentally ugly according to sensory concepts. However, one does not arrive at this by simply turning all the concepts one has gained through the senses upside down. That would be an easy way out. Then someone could describe the Devachan plan, for example, by saying that everything that is ugly in the sensory world is beautiful, ugly is beautiful, green is red, black is white, and so on. But you can't do that. Instead, you have to get these ideas from experiencing the supersensible worlds. One acquires them in the same way as the perceptions that a maturing child acquires of the sensory world, not through theories, but through experience, and then finds it completely unnatural to call a devil ugly who presents himself as a devil, when one is aware that one is speaking the language of the supersensible worlds. But one must acquire such a way of feeling if one really wants to orient oneself in the supersensible worlds, if one wants to know one's way around them and move about in them. Therefore, you can now easily imagine what is meant when, for the sake of simplicity, we say: On the one hand there is the sensory world, on the other hand there are the supersensible worlds; there we pass from sensory being across the corresponding boundary into supersensible being. If you go there with everything you have gained in sensory being, if you apply what you have gained in terms of ideas, concepts, and notions from the sensory world, then everything is inaccurate; then you talk nothing but nonsense. One must thoroughly relearn at the boundary, not theoretically, but vividly. One cannot use anything at all that one has acquired in the sensory world in the way of ideas; one must leave it behind. You see that one must leave behind much with which one is quite intimately connected in the world of sensory being, and I would now like to describe the matter to you concretely and vividly, not from theory.
Let us assume that someone, after acquiring the ability to cross the marked boundary, passes from the sensory world into the supersensible world. At the boundary, he asks himself: What must I leave behind if I want to find my way around in the supersensible world? I must leave behind—he can say to himself with good self-reflection—actually everything that I have experienced, learned, and acquired in the various incarnations from the beginning of time on Earth up to the present. I must lay this aside here, for I am entering a world in which what can be learned within incarnations no longer has any meaning. It is easy, I would say, to express such a thing; it is easy to hear such a thing; it is easy to grasp it in abstract concepts. But it is a whole inner world to perceive, to feel, to experience something like this: to lay down everything there like clothes, everything one has acquired in all the incarnations in the sensory world in order to enter a world in which none of this makes sense anymore. If you have this feeling alive, then you also have a living experience—really nothing to do with any theory—like the one you have when you encounter a real person in the real world, whom you get to know by talking to them, by their behavior toward you, whom you do not get to know by constructing concepts about them, but by them living with you. Thus, at the boundary between being a sense being and being a spirit, one is confronted not with a system of concepts, but with a reality that only appears as a supersensible reality, but is as concrete and as alive as a human being: this is the guardian of the threshold. He is there as a concrete, real being. And if you get to know him, you also get to know him as a being who belongs to the category of beings who, in a certain way, have participated in life since the beginning of the earth, but then did not participate in what we experience as soul beings. This is the being who was to be dramatized in the mystery drama “The Guardian of the Threshold” with the words:
You know him who must guard the threshold of this realm
Since the beginning of the earth,
What beings need in order to enter it,
Those who belong to your time and your kind.
This “your time and your kind” is something that follows from the nature of the matter. Human beings have other times and other kinds—other kinds and other times have the beings who have in a certain way separated themselves from the paths of humanity since the beginning of the earth. Here we encounter a being about whom we say: I have before me a being who experiences and undergoes many things in the world; but he is not concerned with what can be experienced on earth in terms of love, pain, and suffering, but also in terms of mistakes and immorality; he knows nothing and wants to know nothing about what has taken place in human existence up to now. Christian tradition expresses this fact by saying that before the mystery of the Incarnation, these beings veiled their faces. A whole world is expressed in the difference between these beings and human beings.
And now comes a feeling that one has immediately, which arises as when one stands before a person who has blond hair and has the immediate feeling: this person has blond hair. This is how the feeling arises: because you have passed through the earthly cultures, you have necessarily acquired imperfections, but you must return to your original state, you must find your way back on earth, and this being can show you this because it has not taken on your faults. Now you stand before a being like a real reproach, great and magnificent, like an incentive to become what you are not. This being shows you this in the most vivid way, and you can feel completely fulfilled before this being with the knowledge of what you are or are not. You stand before a living reproach. This being belongs to the class of archangels, the Archangeloi, as we say. It is a very real encounter, and it causes one to suddenly realize what one has become as an earthly human being in the sense of the senses. At the same time, it is self-knowledge in the truest and most comprehensive sense. One sees oneself as one is, and one sees oneself as one should now become!
Human beings are not always suited to this kind of seeing. Today I have only spoken of the world of concepts and ideas that must be discarded. Much else must also be discarded. When one reaches the guardian of the threshold, one must actually discard everything one knows about oneself. One must then have only one thing left in order to get through. That is what matters! The fact that one must leave everything behind at the threshold causes an inner experience that one must be able to cope with, and the preparation for this stage of clairvoyance must consist, and does consist, in proper training—in proper training one cannot speak of dangers, for it is precisely proper training that eliminates dangers—in learning to endure what would otherwise be terrifying and frightening. One must learn to endure through preparation, for that is the fundamental power for all further experience. In ordinary life, human beings are not capable of enduring everything that must be endured when one stands before the guardian of the threshold. For the guardian of the threshold is compelled to do something highly peculiar, which must be judged from the point of view of the supersensible world if it is not to be misunderstood. Human beings are always such that the activities of the supersensible world take place within them; they are simply unaware of this. While we think, feel, and will, there is always an activity of the astral body and a connection with the astral world going on alongside. But human beings are unaware of this because if they knew what their own bodies were, they would not be able to bear it and would be stunned. Therefore, when a human being encounters this entity without sufficient preparation, it must conceal all this from him and conceal itself; it must draw a veil over the supersensible world. It must do this for the protection of human beings who, standing in the sense world, would not be able to bear the sight. Here we see clearly a concept that we can only judge morally in our sense life as the most immediate natural order. The protection of man from seeing the supersensible world is the function of the guardian of the threshold, the preservation of man in the state in which he is before he has sufficiently prepared himself for the supersensible worlds.
Thus we have attempted to bring together some ideas that can lead us to a concept of the guardian of the threshold. I have tried to compile such ideas, concepts, experiences, and impressions in a small book that will be presented to you here in the next few days and which, in addition to the lectures themselves, may be of important help to you. It will be divided into a series of eight meditations and will be presented in such a way that the reader, when going through these meditations, will gain something for their soul life. Today I have attempted to characterize some of the ideas that can lead us to the guardian of the threshold. Starting from this point, we will try to characterize some insights and perspectives as we pass by the guardian of the threshold, in order to then be able to understand the Christ being and the Christ initiation even more deeply.