The Gospel of St. Mark
GA 139
21 September 1912, Basel
Lecture VII
When we are engaged in the study of one or other of the Gospels and trying to explain it, it would doubtless be best to leave the other Gospels altogether out of account. By this means it would be possible to reach the purest and best understanding of the prevailing tone of each. But it is obvious that such an approach could lead to misunderstandings, unless a ray of light were thrown upon it from one of the other Gospels. And precisely what we called yesterday the “greatest monologue in world history” can easily be misunderstood if someone were to consult in a superficial and not too accurate manner what had, for example, to be said in connection with the similar passage in the Matthew Gospel in the lectures I gave in Bern.1Rudolf Steiner gave his cycle on the Matthew Gospel in Bern in September, 1910. The last edition of this cycle in English was published in London by Rudolf Steiner Press in 1965. The question about the handing over of the power of the keys was discussed in Lectures 11 and 12. Indeed, an objection made from such a standpoint would really in a deeper logical sense be the same as if the statement were made that a man once stood on this platform and on his left was a bouquet of roses. Then another statement would be made that a man once stood on this platform and on his right was a bouquet of roses, and a man who had not been present proceeded to object, saying that there must be a mistake since one time the bouquet of roses was on the right and the other time on the left. It all depends on where the observer in question was standing, for both statements can be correct. So it is with the Gospels, where we are not concerned simply with an abstract biography of Christ Jesus, but with a rich world of external and occult facts that are presented in them.
In order to picture to ourselves this viewpoint let us now consider again what we called yesterday the “greatest monologue in world history,” the soliloquy of the God. We must recognize that the whole episode was especially concerned with the relationship between Christ Jesus and His closest disciples. And we must include in such a study most particularly what was said yesterday, that the spirit of Elijah, after it had been freed from the physical body of John the Baptist, was actually active as a kind of group soul of the disciples. What happened then cannot just be related in a simple external way since it took place in a much more complicated manner. To a certain extent there was a deep and inner connection between the soul of the Christ and the souls of the Twelve. Everything that took place within the soul of Christ was made up of processes of significance for that time, rich and manifold processes. But all that took place in the soul of Christ took place again in a kind of reflected image, a reflection in the souls of the disciples, but divided into twelve parts. In this way each of the Twelve experienced, as in a reflected image, a part of what happened in the soul of Christ Jesus; but each of the Twelve experienced it somewhat differently. What took place within the soul of Christ Jesus was like a harmony, a great symphony, reflected in the souls of each of the Twelve, in much the same way as twelve instruments can give forth a harmony. So any event that concerns one or more of the disciples in particular may be described from two sides. It is possible to describe how the event in question appeared within the soul of Christ, as, for example, in the case of the great world-historical monologue of Christ Jesus. It is possible to describe how it was experienced within His soul, and then it appears as it was described yesterday. But it also takes place in a certain reflected image in the soul of Peter. Peter has the same soul experience. But, whereas in the case of Christ Jesus it encompasses the whole of mankind, Peter's identical experience encompasses only a twelfth part of all mankind, a twelfth, a single zodiacal sign of the entire Christ spirit. For this reason it must be pictured differently when it concerns Christ Jesus Himself.
It must be spoken of in this way if we are to describe it in the sense of the Mark Gospel, for most remarkable things are described in it, and especially what is presented as having taken place within the soul of Christ Jesus Himself. By contrast the Matthew Gospel pictures more what has reference to the soul of Peter, and what Christ Jesus added to explain what took place within Peter's soul. If you read the Gospel carefully, you will notice how in the Matthew Gospel certain words have been added which give us the picture as perceived from the side of Peter. Otherwise, why should the words have been added, “Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jonah, for flesh and blood have not revealed it to you but my Father in the heavens.” (Matt. 16:17)? In other words the soul of Peter felt something of what the soul of Christ had been feeling. But while Peter's soul felt that his master was Christ, this should be understood as meaning that Peter was for a time raised upward to an experience in his higher “I,” and that he was overwhelmed by this experience and then fell back, as it were, afterward. Nevertheless it was possible for him to penetrate through to a knowledge which, with a different aim and purpose, came about within the soul of Christ. Because Peter was able to do this, there followed the handing over of the power of the keys mentioned in the Matthew Gospel (Matt. 16:19), about which we spoke in our interpretation of that Gospel. By contrast, in speaking of the Mark Gospel we have emphasized, forcefully and simply, those words that indicate that the event, quite apart from what happened within Peter, took place at the same time and in a parallel manner as the monologue of God.
This is how we must look at these things, enabling us to feel how Christ Jesus deals with His own, how He leads them on from stage to stage, and how after the spirit of Elijah-John had passed over into them He could lead them more deeply than He could earlier into the comprehension of spiritual secrets. And one of our first impressions is that it is significant that the passage we discussed at the end of our last lecture, the monologue of the God, should be closely followed by the so-called Transfiguration or Transformation scene. That is also a significant element in the dramatic composition of the Mark Gospel. In order to shed light on the Transfiguration we need to point out a few facts that are related to many things necessary for the understanding of the picture presented in the Gospels. Let us begin by referring to one of these.
You can read often in the Mark Gospel, as well as in the other Gospels, how Christ Jesus speaks of how the Son of Man must suffer many things, that He would be set upon by the scribes and high priests, that He would be put to death and after three days would be raised. You will notice how up to a certain point the apostles are unable to understand at first what is meant by the suffering, death and raising of the Son of Man, how they experience a real difficulty particularly in understanding this passage (Mark 9:31-32). Why are we confronted with this peculiar fact? Why is it precisely with reference to the understanding of the Mystery of Golgotha itself that the apostles experience these difficulties? What then is the Mystery of Golgotha? We have already spoken of this. It is nothing else but the drawing forth of initiation from the depths of the mysteries onto the plane of world history. Of course there is a crucial difference between the average initiation and the Mystery of Golgotha. This difference consists in the following.
All those who were initiated into the mysteries of the various peoples had in a certain sense experienced the same thing. An initiate was made to suffer, and one could say that he was apparently dead for three days, during which his spirit remained in the spiritual worlds outside his body. Then his spirit was brought back into his body in such a way that the spirit in his body could remember what it had undergone in the spiritual world, and could then appear as a messenger, proclaiming the secrets of the spiritual world. Thus we can say that initiation is a journey into death, though in such a death the spirit is not separated entirely from the body, but only for a limited time. Initiation involves remaining outside the physical body and returning into it, thereby becoming a messenger for the secrets of the divine world. It took place after careful preparation, and after the candidate had reached a condition where his soul forces were so concentrated within him that he could live without using the instrument of his physical body. Then after these three and a half days he had to unite himself again with his physical body. We may say that the initiate passed through this by withdrawing into a higher world unconnected with ordinary historical events.
Although the Mystery of Golgotha was, to outward appearance, similar, it differed in its inner nature. The events that occurred during the period when the Christ dwelt in the body of Jesus of Nazareth had actually resulted in the genuine physical death of the physical body of Jesus of Nazareth. The spirit of Christ remained for three days outside the physical body but it then returned. And now it was not in the physical body but in the concentrated etheric body, concentrated in such a way that it was possible for the disciples to perceive it, as described in the Gospels—with the consequence that Christ could walk and become visible also after the event of Golgotha. Thereby initiation, which formerly took place in the depths of the mysteries, hidden from external eyes, was presented as a historical event, a unique event, before all mankind. Through this, initiation was, in a sense, lifted out of the mysteries; it had been accomplished by the one Christ before the eyes of everyone. And precisely with this event the ancient world came to an end and the new era began.
From the picture that has been given you of the prophets you have seen that the prophetic spirit, and what was given by this prophetic spirit to the ancient Hebrew people, differed from the spirit of initiation prevalent among other peoples. These other peoples had their initiates, who were initiated in the manner we have just described. This was not the case with the ancient Hebrew people. With them it was not a question of initiation of the same kind as among the other peoples. Here we have to do with an elemental emergence of the spirit within the bodies of those who appeared as prophets; something resembling “geniuses of spirituality” appeared. To enable this to happen we see that in the middle prophetic period souls appear in the ancient Hebrew people who in earlier incarnations had been initiates among the other peoples, so that they experience everything they give to the ancient Hebrew people as a memory of what they themselves had received in their initiation. For this reason spiritual life did not shine into the ancient Hebrew people in the same way as it did into other peoples. In the case of these other peoples it occurred through an act, through initiation, whereas in the case of the Old Testament people it came by virtue of the gifts that had been implanted in those who worked actively as prophets among the people. Through the activity of their prophets the Hebrew people were made ready to experience that unique initiation which was no longer that of a human individuality but of a cosmic individuality, if, indeed one may speak of an initiation at all in this case, which is no longer correct. Through this the Hebrew people were prepared to receive something that was to take the place of the old initiation: they were made ready to view the Mystery of Golgotha in the right way. But one consequence of this was that the apostles, who belonged to the Old Testament people, had at first no understanding of the words that characterize initiation. Christ Jesus spoke about initiation when He expressed himself in such terms as hastening toward death, remaining in the grave for three days and being raised from the dead. This is a description of initiation. If He had described it in a different way they would have understood Him. But because such a way of speaking of initiation was foreign to the Old Testament people the Twelve could not at first understand His description. So it is quite correctly pointed out to us that the disciples were astonished and did not know to what He was referring when He spoke of the suffering and death and raising of the Son of Man.
Such things are therefore entirely in accord with the spiritual content of the events as they are historically presented. When the ancient initiate experienced his initiation it is true that he was in a higher world while he was outside his body; he was not in the ordinary sense-perceptible world. We may say that while he was outside his body he was at one with the realities of a higher plane. While he was free of his body in the spiritual world, returning later to his body, what had he experienced? It was memory. He had to speak in such a way that he could say, “I remember my experiences when I was free of my body, in the same way as in ordinary life one can remember what one experienced yesterday or the day before.” He could bear witness to them. As far as these initiates are concerned it did not amount to much more than that they bore in their souls the secrets of the spiritual worlds in the same way that the human soul retains in memory what it experienced yesterday. And as the soul is united with what it retains as memory, so the initiates were united with the secrets of the spiritual world that they carried within themselves.
What was the reason for this? It was because before the Mystery of Golgotha human souls on earth were not adapted to allowing the kingdoms of the heavens, the super-sensible worlds, to penetrate into the ego. They could not approach the true ego, could not unite themselves with it. Only if a man could see beyond himself or could glimpse the divine by means of the clairvoyance that existed in those ancient times, if, as I might put it, he dreamt himself away or were freed from his ego through initiation, could he enter the super-sensible worlds. But within the ego there was no comprehension, no understanding of the higher worlds. This is how it was in those ancient times. Before the Mystery of Golgotha man could not unite himself with the spiritual worlds even by making use of all the forces pertaining to his ego.
The secret that was to be revealed to the people through the baptism of John was that the time had now come near when the kingdoms of heaven were to shine right into the ego; they were to approach the ego, the earthly ego. In truth it has been indicated all through the ages how what man could experience as his soul element could not in ancient times enter the super-sensible worlds. In ancient times there was something like a disharmony between the way in which the true home of man, the spiritual world, was experienced, and that which, if we wish to describe the old soul nature as “ego,” was active in the inner being of man. This human inner self was separated from the spiritual world, and only in exceptional conditions could it be united with it. And when all the might of what was later to become the ego and to live within man, when all the power and the impulses of the ego filled him, for example through initiation, or through remembering the experience of initiation in a former incarnation in a later one—when the power and might of the ego prematurely penetrated into his bodily nature, what happened then? It has always been pointed out that in the pre-Christian era the ego force, too powerful for the human bodily nature, could find its proper place in the body, and broke through what was destined for the ego.
For this reason those human beings who bear within themselves more of the super-sensible world, bearing within themselves in pre-Christian times something of what would in a later age become the ego, such persons split apart their human bodily constitution with this ego force because this force is too strong for the pre-Christian era. This is clearly alluded to, for example, in the case of certain individualities during a particular incarnation who possess this ego force in themselves, but this ego can remain within them only because the body is in some way wounded, or vulnerable, wounded and having a vulnerable spot. It is in this spot that the individuality is exposed to danger from his surroundings more than in any other part of his body. We need only recall the vulnerability of Achilles' heel, of Siegfried and Oedipus whose bodies are split asunder by the force of the ego. These examples of wounds demonstrate to us how only a damaged body is compatible with the greatness of the ego, and the superhuman ego force that is within it.
Perhaps the significance of what I am trying to place before our souls could be grasped better if I formulate it in a different way. Let us suppose that someone in pre-Christian times were to be filled, not necessarily consciously, with all those impulses and forces that later on will penetrate the ego, and that these forces which I might call a superego force, a superhuman force, were to dive down into his body. He would have to break apart his body and not perceive it as it was when it had its weak ego, its weak inner self, within it. A man of olden times would necessarily have seen it differently if he possessed within himself the whole power of the ego, enabling him to rise up out of his body. He would have seen the body as it actually was, broken under the influence of the superego. He would have seen it with every kind of wound imaginable because in ancient times only a weak ego, a weak inner self, penetrated the body so slightly that it could remain whole.
What I have just said was indeed stated by the prophets. The passage (Zechariah 12:10) is so formulated that it runs approximately as follows, “A man who unites in himself the full force of egohood and is confronted with the human body, sees it wounded, pierced through with holes. For the higher ego force which in ancient times could not yet live within the inner self, pierces through, penetrates and makes holes in the body.” This is an impulse that runs through the evolution and development of mankind for the reason that as a result of the influence of Lucifer and Ahriman in pre- Christian times only a portion of the ego could be bestowed on man. And because the body is adapted only to the smaller portion and not to the whole force of the ego, it is worn down. It was not because this took place in the pre-Christian era but because in the case of Christ Jesus the full power of the ego entered all at once, and entered with the utmost strength into His bodily being, that this body had to appear not only with a single wound, as was the case with so many human individualities who carried a superego, but with five wounds. These were necessary because the Christ-Being, that is, the full ego of man, projected far beyond the bodily form appropriate for those times. It was for this reason that the cross had to be erected on the physical plane of world history, that cross that bore the body of Christ, a human body such as that of man would be if for a moment the whole of man's nature, a large part of which has been lost through the influence of Lucifer and Ahriman, were to live within one single human being.
It is a profound mystery that is given to us by occult science in the picture of the Mystery of Golgotha. Anyone who understands the true nature of the human being and of humanity, and the nature of the earthly ego and its relation to the form of the human body, knows that when the human body is entirely penetrated by the earthly ego such a penetration would be abnormal for the ordinary man as he walks about on earth. But when a man goes out of himself and sees himself from outside and is able to ask the question, “How would this body be if the totality of egohood were to enter into it?” then his answer must be that it would be pierced by five wounds. The form of the cross on Golgotha with Christ upon it with His wounds is derived from the nature of man and from the very being of the earth itself. From our study of the nature of man it is possible for the picture of the Mystery of Golgotha to arise for us out of our own knowledge. Strange as it may seem, it is actually possible to see how the cross is raised on Golgotha, how the crucifixion takes place, and to perceive directly the truth of this historical event, and all this without the use of clairvoyance when such a vision would be natural. Because of the Mystery of Golgotha it is possible for the human intellect to approach so closely to this mystery that if it is used with sufficient sharpness and subtlety it can be transformed into an imagination, into a picture that then contains the truth. If we understand the nature of Christ and His relation to the human bodily form, our imagination can be guided in this way in such a manner that the picture of Golgotha itself arises for us. The older Christian painters were often guided in this way. Even though they were not perhaps in all cases clairvoyant, their knowledge of the Mystery of Golgotha was so powerful that it impelled them so far that they were able to picture it in such a way that they could paint it. It was just at this great turning point of human evolution that the understanding of the being of Christ, in other words, the primal ego of man, emerged out of clairvoyance and rose up into the ego-soul of man.
It is possible to see the Mystery of Golgotha through clairvoyance outside the body. By what means? If while within the body a relationship has been established to the Mystery of Golgotha, it is possible also today to perceive it in the higher worlds, and in so doing to receive a full confirmation of the truth of this great nodal point in the evolution of mankind. It is, however, also possible to comprehend the Mystery of Golgotha, and the words I have just spoken ought to make this understanding possible. It is, of course, necessary to reflect and meditate on them for a long time. If anyone should feel it difficult to grasp what has just been said, such a feeling is perfectly justifiable, for it goes without saying that anything that can lead the human soul to a full understanding of the highest and most significant event that has ever happened on earth is bound to be difficult. In a certain way the disciples had to be led toward this understanding; and of all those who had to be led gradually to a new understanding of the evolution of mankind, Peter, James, and John proved to be the most suitable.
It is good for us to picture to ourselves from as many sides as we can the significant epoch that began at the time of the Mystery of Golgotha. Therefore it was especially helpful that you were able to hear this morning how Hegel2The lecture given by Michael Bauer was entitled “How did Hegel see the great Turning-Point in Time?” Among Hegel's more important works was his Philosophy of History. envisaged this turning point of time. We need everything that human understanding can contribute if we are to grasp the significance of what entered into human evolution at that time, something that had been maturing during the preceding centuries and took place about the time of the Mystery of Golgotha, thereafter slowly preparing and conditioning the further evolution of humanity. It manifested itself in various parts of the earth and we can trace it not only in Palestine where the Mystery of Golgotha itself occurred, but in other parts of the earth where the Mystery of Golgotha did not occur. If we proceed in the right way we can trace how as a result of the Mystery of Golgotha mankind descended and then reascended, and was uplifted as the Mystery of Golgotha spread throughout the Western world. In particular we can trace the descent of mankind, and this indeed is especially interesting.
Let us consider once again the land of Greece, and picture to ourselves what happened there half a millennium before the Mystery of Golgotha. In the East, where Krishna appeared, people were in a certain way ahead of their time in the period when the old clairvoyance was dying out. Indeed, there was something remarkable about the culture of ancient India. During the time immediately following the Atlantean age with the great cultural flowering of the first post-Atlantean epoch, the human soul still had the possibility of seeing into the spiritual world in the purest manner. In the case of the Rishis this faculty was accompanied by the wonderful ability to present what they had seen in such a way that it could influence later ages. Then when the clairvoyance disappeared, what they had given could be preserved in such significant revelations as those given out by Krishna; although the true clairvoyance already had been extinguished by the end of the third epoch. But what had been perceived in this earlier age was preserved in wonderful words through Krishna and his pupils, with the result that what at an earlier time had been seen could now be expressed in writing. So what happened further west, for example in Greece, never happened in India at all.
If we perceive correctly the Indian world we may say that the old clairvoyance died out, and because it died out some men, among whom Krishna was the most important, wrote down in wonderful words what had formerly been seen. This, then, appears in the Vedas, in the word; and anyone who immerses himself in the word experiences an echo of it in his soul. But this is quite different from what came forth, for example, in Socrates or other philosophers. What may be called Western intellect, Western power of judgment, never appears in Indian souls. Nor can there be found one example in India of what we today speak of in the fullest sense as the inborn power of the ego. As a result just as the old clairvoyance was dying out there came an urge toward Yoga, a new means of ascending into the spiritual worlds through training as a compensation for the loss of natural clairvoyance. Yoga therefore became an artificial clairvoyance, and the philosophy of Yoga appeared without a time interval, such as that during which, in Greece, for example, a rational philosophy appeared. Nothing of this appeared in India; an interim phase was totally lacking. If we take up the Vedanta philosophy of Vyasa we may say that it is not distinguished for its ideas and intellect as are the teachings of the Western world conceptions, but it appears to have been brought down from higher worlds though expressed in human speech. What is remarkable about it is that it was not achieved through human thinking, nor is it thought out like the characteristic teachings of Socrates and Plato. It was, indeed, the product of clairvoyant perception.
It is difficult to come to a clear idea about such matters. Nevertheless, there is a possibility even at the present time to experience the difference between these two kinds of philosophy. Take up any book on philosophy, any presentation of some Western philosophical system. How has anything that can be regarded as a serious philosophy been achieved? If you could see into the workroom of anyone who can be regarded today as a serious philosopher you would see how it is through the power of logical thinking and logical judgment that such systems are created, and each is built up step by step. But those who work out their philosophies in this way are quite unable to understand that their kind of conceptual weaving can also to a certain extent be perceived clairvoyantly, that a clairvoyant can see it in front of him through his clairvoyance. If therefore, instead of passing through all the individual stages of thought we were to survey clairvoyantly, in one fell swoop so to speak, a number of philosophical theses that have been woven together by the sweat of one's brow, concept by concept, then we shall experience much difficulty in making ourselves understood. Yet the concepts of the Vedanta philosophy are concepts of this kind, and they were seen clairvoyantly. They were not acquired by the sweat of the brow, like the concepts of European philosophers, but were brought down clairvoyantly. They are just the last remnants of the ancient clairvoyance, diluted into abstract concepts. Or else they are the first fragile conquests of Yoga in the super-sensible worlds.
Those people who lived more to the West went through different experiences. There we see remarkable and important inner events in the evolution of mankind. Let us take the case of a remarkable philosopher of the sixth century before the Christian era, Pherecydes of Syros.3Pherecydes of Syros, 6th century B.C. Only fragments of his cosmogony have been preserved. For this reason and the “unphilosophical” nature of these fragments his name does not even appear in most histories of philosophy. He was indeed a remarkable philosopher, though present-day philosophers do not count him even as a philosopher at all. There are books on philosophy which actually say—I will quote a few words verbatim—that all he gives are childish symbols, childish descriptions. So does a man today speak who imagines himself to be greatly superior to those ancient philosophers. He calls these notions “childish and ingenious.” Nevertheless, half a millennium before the Christian era a remarkable thinker emerged in Syros. Certainly he describes things differently from other thinkers, who were later to be called philosophers. For example, Pherecydes says, “Underlying everything visible in the world is a trinity: Chronos, Zeus and Chthon. From Chronos comes the airy, the fiery and the watery element. Ophioneus, a kind of serpent being, comes into conflict with all that stems from these three powers.” Even if we have no clairvoyance but only some imagination it is possible to see in front of us everything that he describes. Chronos is put forward not merely as abstract passing time but as a real being in a perceptible form. It is the same with Zeus, the limitless ether, as a living self-perpetuating being; while Chthon, who draws down to earth what once was heavenly, draws together into the planet earth all that is woven in space, in order to make earthly existence possible. All this happens on earth. Then a kind of serpent being interferes, and introduces, so to speak, a hostile element. If we examine what this remarkable Pherecydes of Syros describes, it can easily be understood without the aid of spiritual research. He is a last straggler endowed with the clairvoyance of earlier times. He sees behind the sense world to the real causes, and these he describes with the aid of his clairvoyance. Naturally this does not at all please those who prefer to juggle concepts. He sees the living weaving of the good gods and how hostile powers interfere in their work; and all this he describes from the viewpoint of a clairvoyant. He sees how the elements are born out of Chronos, out of Time seen as a real being.
So we have in this philosopher Pherecydes of Syros a man who still sees into the world with his soul, gazing into the world disclosed by clairvoyant consciousness, and describing it; and we are able to follow his description. Thus he stands before us in the Western world as late as the sixth century, B.C. while Thales, Anaximenes, Anaximander and Heraclitus,4Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes (c. 636–546 B.C.; c. 611–547 B.C.; 6th century B.C.) were all from Miletus in Asia Minor and are regarded as the first true philosophers, Thales being, as Aristotle called him, the Father of Philosophy.
Heraclitus of Ephesus, c. 535–c. 475 B.C. Rudolf Steiner who discusses him at length in Christianity as Mystical Fact calls him an initiate priest as well as a philosopher.
Nietzsche, Friedrich, 1844–1900. German philosopher, author of The Birth of Tragedy, and Thus Spake Zarathustra.
Parmenides of Elea, born about 514 B.C., who held that true change was impossible and all apparent change was illusory.
Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, c. 500–428 B.C. Philosopher who is credited with founding the study of philosophy in Athens. who are almost his contemporaries, stand there in a quite different manner. Here two worlds actually come together. But how does it appear within the souls of these men? The old clairvoyance has been extinguished, paralyzed in them, and at most all that is left is a longing for the spiritual worlds. What, then, do they experience in place of the living vision that the sage of Syros still possessed, a man who could still look into the world of primal causes? This world has closed to them; they can no longer see into it. It is as if this world wished to close itself to them, as if it was still half present for them but nevertheless eluded them, with the result that they replace the old clairvoyance with abstract concepts that belong to the ego. This is how it appears in the souls of these men. Indeed within these Western souls there was a very remarkable condition of soul at that time. It is moving in the direction of intellect and judgment, which are precisely the characteristics of the ego. We see this within individual souls, as, for instance, in Heraclitus who still describes the living weaving fire as the cause of everything, with, we could say, a last trace of true clairvoyant vision. Thales spoke of water, but he did not mean physical, material water any more than Heraclitus meant physical material fire. But it remains something from the elemental world, which they can still half see through while at the same time it half eludes them, so that all they can give out are abstract concepts. In looking into these souls we can understand how something of the soul mood of these men can still echo into our own time.
If only our contemporaries were not so prone to skim thoughtlessly over so much that is of value! It is so easy to skim lightly over a passage in Nietzsche that can profoundly move us, take possession of us and shake our souls. The passage occurs in his posthumous work Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks, where he describes Thales, Anaximander, Heraclitus, Parmenides, Anaxagoras and Empedocles. Right at the beginning of this work there is a passage where, if we truly enter into it, we can see that Nietzsche perceived something of what these first lonely Greek thinkers experienced in their souls. Look up the passage in Nietzsche where he says, “How must it have been with the souls of those heroes of philosophy who had to make the transition from the period of living vision (of which Nietzsche knew nothing but that he was able to sense) to an age when what had formerly been alive in their souls was superseded by dry, abstract, prosaic concepts; when ‘being,’ that cold, abstract, prosaic notion, appeared, as a ‘concept,’ replacing the full aliveness of clairvoyant consciousness?” And Neitzsche feels, “It is as if our blood would freeze in our veins when we cross over from the realm of life into the world of concepts in Thales or Heraclitus who use such concepts as ‘being’ and ‘becoming,’ so that we pass from the warm realm of becoming over into the icy region of ‘concepts.’ ”
We must transport ourselves in feeling into the age in which these men were living, and how they stood when the Mystery of Golgotha was approaching. We must enter into their being in such a way that we can perceive how there is still within them a dim echo of former times, yet how they must content themselves with the power of abstract judgment that lives in the human ego, a power that was unnecessary in earlier times. And whereas in later eras the world of concepts became richer and richer, in the first period when the world of concepts was coming closer the Greek philosophers could grasp nothing but the most simple of them. How they tormented themselves with such concepts as abstract “being,” especially the philosophers of the Eleatic school! But it was in this way that the present-day abstract qualities of the ego were prepared.
Let us now think of a soul which is rooted in the West, prepared for the mission of the West, and yet bears within itself the powerful echo of ancient clairvoyance. In India these echoes have long since died away, but they are still present in the West. The soul has the impulse to enter the elemental world, but it is prevented by its consciousness. A mood such as that of the Buddha could not arise in such souls. The Buddha mood would have said, “We are brought into the world of suffering. Let us free ourselves from it.” But Western souls wanted to take hold of what was ahead of them. They could not go back into what lay behind them. But in the world in front of them they could find only cold, icy concepts. Consider such a soul as Pherecydes of Syros who was the last to be able to see into the elemental world. Now let us think of one of the other souls who cannot see how the elements are born in a living way out of Chronos. It is unable to see how Ophioneus, the serpent-being, enters into conflict with the higher gods, but it is able to glimpse that something is at work in the physical material world. It cannot see through to Chronos, but it sees the imprint of Chronos in the world of sense, in fire, water, air and earth. It is not able to see how the higher gods are opposed by the lower gods, and how Lucifer, the serpent-god, rebels; but it does see how harmony and disharmony, friendship and enmity prevail. It sees love and hate as abstract concepts, and fire, water, air, and earth as abstract elements. The soul beholds all that still at that time penetrated into it, but what had been seen earlier by contemporaries is now hidden.
Let us think of such a soul still standing within the livingness of the earlier era, but unable to see into the spiritual world, able only to grasp its external counterpart, a soul which because of its special mission found that what had previously brought bliss to human beings was hidden from it. Yet this soul has nothing from the new world of the ego save a few concepts to which it feels obliged to cling. What we have before us is the soul of Empedocles. If we wish to comprehend the inner being of such a soul, then it is the soul of Empedocles that stands before us. Empedocles is almost a contemporary of the sage of Syros; he lives scarcely two-thirds of a century later. But his soul is constituted quite differently. It had the task of crossing the Rubicon that separated the old clairvoyance from the abstract comprehension of the ego. We see here two worlds suddenly clashing with one another. Here we see the dawning of the ego and how it advances toward its fulfillment. We see the souls of the ancient Greek philosophers who were the first to be condemned to take up what we now call intellect and logic; and we see at the same time how their souls were emptied of the old revelations. Into these souls the new impulse, the impulse of Golgotha, had to be poured.
Thus were their souls constituted when the new impulse was born. But they had to yearn for a new fulfillment; without such a yearning they could not understand it. In Indian thinking there is scarcely any transition comparable with what we find in the lonely Greek thinkers. Therefore Indian philosophy which had just made its transition to the teaching of Yoga hardly offers any possibility of discovering the transition to the Mystery of Golgotha. Greek philosophy was prepared in such a way that it thirsted for the Mystery of Golgotha. Consider the Gnosis, and how it longed in its philosophy for the Mystery of Golgotha. The philosophy of the Mystery of Golgotha rests on a Greek foundation because the best of the Greek souls longed to receive into themselves the impulse of Golgotha.
In order to understand what happened in mankind's evolution we must have good will. We might then be able to perceive something that might be described as a call, and an answering call from the very soil of the earth. If we look at Greece and then further toward Sicily and look into such souls, among whom Empedocles is one of the most outstanding, then we become aware of an astonishing kind of appeal. How can we characterize this for ourselves? What are such souls saying? If we look into the soul of Empedocles we hear something like this, “I know of initiation through history. From history I know that the super-sensible world entered into human souls through initiation. Initiation can no longer come alive in us. Now we are living in a different phase of evolution, and we have need of a new impulse that reaches into the ego. Tell me, Impulse, where are you, you who are to take the place of the initiation of the past that we are no longer able to experience, whose task is to place before the new ego the same mystery that was once contained within the old clairvoyance?”
To this appeal there came in answer the cry from Golgotha, “By obeying the gods and not human beings I was permitted to bring down the mysteries and set them before all mankind, so that what could hitherto be found only in the depths of the mysteries might now be bestowed on all mankind.”
What was born in Greek souls in southern Europe comes to us as a request from the Western world for a new solution of the world riddle. And as the answer, an answer that can be understood only in the West, comes the great monologue of the God, of which we spoke at the conclusion of yesterday's lecture, and of which we shall speak again tomorrow.
Siebenter Vortrag
Am besten wäre es zweifellos, wenn man bei den Betrachtungen, die sich an das eine oder andere der Evangelien erklärend anknüpfen sollen, immer ganz absehen könnte von den anderen Evangelien; denn dadurch würde das reinste und beste Verständnis des Grundtones des einzelnen Evangeliums zustande kommen. Allein es liegt nahe, daß eine solche Betrachtungsweise - wenn man gar nicht den einen oder anderen Lichtstrahl von einem Evangelium aus auf die anderen wirft doch leicht Mißverständnisse hervorrufen kann. So könnte gerade das, was gestern als der «welthistorisch größte Monolog » angegeben worden ist, leicht mißverstanden werden, wenn irgend jemand nicht genau, sondern etwas oberflächlich zu Rate ziehen wollte, was zum Beispiel in Anlehnung an das Matthäus-Evangelium über die ähnliche Stelle gesagt werden muß und auch damals bei den Vorträgen in Bern gesagt worden ist. Und zwar wäre ein Einwand, der etwa von einem solchen Gesichtspunkt aus gemacht würde, im tieferen logischen Sinne eigentlich doch dasselbe, wie wenn es eine Mitteilung gäbe: Hier auf diesem Podium stand einmal ein Mensch, und zu seiner Linken stand ein Rosenbukett - und ein andermal würde man lesen: Hier auf diesem Podium stand einmal ein Mensch, und zu seiner Rechten stand ein Rosenbukett -, und wenn jemand, der nicht daran beteiligt gewesen wäre, dann sagen würde: Das stimmt nicht; denn das eine Mal stand das Rosenbukett rechts, und das andere Mal stand es links. Es kommt eben darauf an, wo der betreffende Beobachter gestanden hat; dann sind beide Sätze richtig. So muß man die Evangelien nehmen. Wir haben es eben nicht zu tun mit einer abstrakten Biographie des Christus Jesus, sondern mit einer reichen Welt von äußeren sowohl wie okkulten Tatsachen, die hier dargestellt sind.
Um diesen Gesichtspunkt ins Auge zu fassen, nehmen wir jetzt einmal das, was gestern der «welthistorisch größte Monolog» genannt worden ist, das Selbstgespräch des Gottes. Wir müssen uns darüber klar sein, daß das, was im Fortgange des Ganzen sich abspielte, sich ganz besonders zwischen dem Christus Jesus und seinen Jüngern, seinen nächsten Schülern, zutrug. Und was gestern gesagt worden ist, daß eigentlich der Geist des Elias, nachdem er befreit war von dem physischen Leib Johannes des Täufers, wie eine Art von Gruppenseele der Jünger wirksam war, das muß zu einer solchen Betrachtung noch ganz besonders hinzugezogen werden. Was damals vorging, das spielte sich nicht nur so ab, daß man es einfach in einer äußerlichen Weise erzählen kann, sondern es spielte sich in einer viel komplizierteren Weise ab. Es war gewissermaßen eine innere und tiefe Wechselbeziehung zwischen der Seele des Christus und der Seele der Zwölf. Was in der Seele des Christus vorging, das waren für die damalige Zeit alles bedeutungsvolle Vorgänge, Vorgänge reicher Art, vielfältige Vorgänge. Aber alles, was in der Seele des Christus vorging, spielte sich gleichsam noch einmal ab wie in einer Art von Spiegelbild, in einer Art von Reflex, in den Seelen der Jünger, aber in zwölf Teile geteilt; so daß jeder der Zwölf einen Teil dessen wie im Spiegelbilde erlebte, was in der Seele des Christus Jesus vorging, aber jeder der Zwölf etwas anderes.
Was in der Seele des Christus Jesus vorging, vorging wie eine große Harmonie, wie eine große Symphonie, das spiegelte sich in der Seele jedes der Zwölf in der Weise etwa wie das, was eines von zwölf Instrumenten geben kann. Daher kann man ein jegliches Ereignis, das sich auf einen oder mehrere der Jünger besonders bezieht, nach zwei Seiten hin schildern. Man kann schildern, wie sich das betreffende Ereignis ausnimmt in der Seele des Christus, so zum Beispiel, was gestern als der große welthistorische Monolog des Christus Jesus hingestellt worden ist; man kann schildern, wie es sich dort abspielte, wie es sich dort erlebte. Da nimmt es sich eben so aus, wie es gestern dargestellt worden ist. Aber in einem gewissen Spiegelbilde geht es auch vor in der Seele des Petrus. Dasselbe Seelenerlebnis geht in Petrus vor. Aber während cs bei dem Christus Jesus die ganze Menschlichkeit einnimmt, geht dasselbe in Petrus so vor, daß es ein Zwölftel ist des gesamten Menschentums, ein Zwölftel oder ein Tierkreiszeichen des gesamten Christus-Geistes. Daher muß man es in einer anderen Weise darstellen, wenn man es darstellt in bezug auf den Christus Jesus selbst.
So muß man reden, wenn man es darstellt im Sinne des MarkusEvangeliums; denn in diesem werden die markanten Dinge dargestellt, und es wird ganz besonders dasjenige dargestellt, was sich in der Seele des Christus Jesus selbst vollzog. Im Matthäus-Evangelium dagegen wird dargestellt, was sich mehr auf die Seele des Petrus bezieht und was der Christus Jesus beitragen kann zur Erklärung dessen, was sich in der Seele des Petrus vollzieht. Lesen Sie das Evangelium genau, dann werden Sie darauf kommen können, wie im Matthäus-Evangelium in noch besonders hinzugefügten Worten die Darstellung von der Seite des Petrus ist. Denn warum werden dort die Worte zugefügt: «Selig bist du, Simon, Sohn des Jona; denn Fleisch und Blut hat es dir nicht geoffenbart, sondern mein Vater in den Himmeln»? (Matth. 16, 17. ) Mit anderen Worten: Etwas von dem, was die Seele des Christus Jesus gefühlt hat, fühlt auch die Seele des Petrus. Aber indem die Seele des Petrus fühlt, daß sein Meister der Christus ist, ist das so auszulegen, daß Petrus eine Weile heraufgehoben ist zu einem Erleben im höheren Ich und überwältigt wird von dem, was er auf diese Weise erlebt, und sozusagen wieder zurückfällt. Aber dennoch war es ihm möglich, hindurchzudringen zu der Erkenntnis, die sich mit anderer Absicht, mit anderem Ziel in der Seele des Christus abspielt. Und weil er dazu fähig war, deshalb jene Übertragung der Schlüsselmacht, von der im Matthäus-Evangelium die Rede ist (Matth. 16, 19) und von der auch bei der Erklärung des Matthäus-Evangeliums gesprochen worden ist. Dagegen haben wir im Markus-Evangelium nur herausgehoben kräftig und einzig diejenigen Worte, welche anzeigen, daß das Ereignis, abgesehen von dem, was es in dem Petrus war, sich abspielte gleichzeitig, parallel, als der Monolog des Gottes.
So müssen wir diese Dinge nehmen. Dann fühlen wir aber auch, wie der Christus Jesus eigentlich mit den Seinigen vorgeht, wie er sie führt von Stufe zu Stufe, wie er, nachdem der Geist des Elias- Johannes auf sie übergegangen ist, sie weiter führen kann im Verständnis der spirituellen Geheimnisse, als er sie früher führen konnte. Und dann fühlen wir erst, welche Bedeutung es hat, daß an die Stelle, die wir gestern am Schlusse besprochen haben als den Monolog des Gottes, sich anschließt die sogenannte Verklärungs- oder Verwandlungsszene. Das ist wieder ein bedeutendes Element in der dramatischen Komposition des Markus-Evangeliums. Um diese Verklärung zu beleuchten, müssen wir auf einiges hinweisen, das mit vielem zusammenhängt, was zum Verständnisse der Darstellung in den Evangelien nötig ist; zunächst auf eines.
Sie können es im Markus-Evangelium und auch in den anderen Evangelien öfter lesen, wie der Christus Jesus davon spricht, daß des Menschen Sohn viel leiden müsse, daß er angefallen würde von den Schriftgelehrten, von den Hohenpriestern, daß er getötet würde, daß er nach drei Tagen auferweckt würde. Und Sie finden überall bis zu einem gewissen Punkt hin deutlich angedeutet, wie die Apostel zunächst diese Redewendung von dem leidenden, sterbenden und auferweckten Menschensohn nicht verstehen können, wie sie Schwierigkeiten haben gerade im Verständnis dieser Stelle (9, 31-32). Warum begegnen wir dieser eigentümlichen Tatsache? Warum treten Schwierigkeiten bei den Aposteln gerade in bezug auf das Verständnis des eigentlichen Mysteriums von Golgatha auf? Was ist denn dieses Mysterium von Golgatha? Wir haben es schon erwähnt. Es ist nichts anderes als das Herausholen der Initiation aus den Tiefen der Mysterien auf den Plan der Weltgeschichte. Natürlich ist ein ganz bedeutsamer Unterschied zwischen einer jeglichen Initiation und dem Mysterium von Golgatha. Der Unterschied liegt in folgendem.
Wer in den Mysterien der verschiedenen Völker initiiert worden ist, hatte in einer gewissen Weise dasselbe durchgemacht. Er wurde gebracht zu Leiden, zu einem dreitägigen, man möchte sagen, scheinbaren Tod, wo sein Geist außerhalb seines Leibes in den spirituellen Welten weilte, wo dann sein Geist wieder zurückgebracht wurde in seinen Leib, so daß der Geist in dem Leib sich erinnern konnte an das, was er in der geistigen Welt durchgemacht hatte, und er als ein Bote auftreten konnte für die Geheimnisse der geistigen Welt. Man kann also sagen, ein Hingehen zum Tode, wenn auch nicht zu dem Tode, der den Geist vollständig, sondern der ihn nur für eine Zeit vom physischen Leibe trennt, das ist die Initiation. Ein Verweilen außerhalb des Leibes und ein Zurückkehren in den physischen Leib und dadurch ein Bote werden der göttlichen Geheimnisse, das ist die Initiation. Sie vollzog sich nach sorgfältiger Vorbereitung, nachdem der Betreffende in die Lage gekommen war, in sich die Kräfte der Seele so verdichtet zu haben, daß er in diesen dreieinhalb Tagen leben konnte, ohne die Instrumente seines physischen Leibes zu gebrauchen. Dann aber, nach diesen dreieinhalb Tagen, mußte er sich wieder mit seinem physischen Leib vereinigen. Er hatte also sozusagen durch Entrückung in eine höhere Welt, abseits von den gewöhnlichen historischen Ereignissen, das durchgemacht.
Anders in seinem inneren Wesen, aber ähnlich in der äußeren Erscheinung war das Mysterium von Golgatha. Die Ereignisse, die sich während des Verweilens des Christus in dem Leib des Jesus von Nazareth abspielten, führten dahin, daß nun tatsächlich der physische Tod eintrat für den physischen Leib des Jesus von Nazareth, daß der Geist des Christus die drei Tage außerhalb des physischen Leibes weilte, dann aber zurückkehrte und jetzt nicht in den physischen Leib, sondern in den verdichteten Ätherleib, so verdichtet, daß ihn die Jünger wahrnehmen konnten, wie es in den Evangelien geschildert ist; so daß der Christus wandeln konnte und sichtbar werden konnte auch nach dem Ereignis von Golgatha. Damit war also als ein historisches Ereignis die Initiation hingestellt, die sonst, den äußeren Augen entzogen, in den Tiefen der Mysterien sich zugetragen hatte, war als ein einmaliges Ereignis hingestellt vor die ganze Menschheit. Damit war in einer gewissen Weise die Initiation herausgeholt aus den Mysterien, war durch den einen Christus vollbracht vor aller Augen. Aber eben damit ist der Abschluß der alten Welt gegeben, ist der Beginn der neuen Zeit gekommen.
Aus der Darstellung, die von den Propheten gegeben worden ist, haben Sie ersehen, daß der Geist des Prophetentums und das, was durch diesen Geist dem althebräischen Volke gegeben worden ist, anders war als der Geist der Initiation der anderen Völker. Die anderen Völker hatten Führer, die Initiierte waren, die so initiiert waren, wie es eben dargestellt worden ist. Das war beim althebräischen Volke nicht so der Fall. Da haben wir es nicht mit Initiationen wie bei anderen Völkern zu tun, sondern wir haben es zu tun, wie wir gehört haben, mit einem elementaren Hervortreten des Geistes in den Leibern derjenigen, die als Propheten auftauchten, mit etwas, was wie Genies der Spiritualität hervortritt. Und damit das sein kann, sehen wir, daß bei den mittleren Propheten diejenigen Seelen im althebräischen Volke auftreten, die in den früheren Inkarnationen Initiierte bei den anderen Völkern waren, damit sie das, was sie dem althebräischen Volke geben, wie eine Erinnerung an das erleben, was sie in der Initiation empfangen haben. So war das Hereinleuchten des spirituellen Lebens anders beim alttestamentlichen Volke und anders bei den anderen Völkern. Bei den letzteren geschah es durch die Handlung, durch die Initiation, beim alttestamentlichen Volke kam es durch die Gaben, die denen eingepflanzt wurden, die eben als Propheten unter dem Volke wirkten.
Durch dieses Wirken seiner Propheten wurde das althebräische Volk dazu vorbereitet, jene einzigartige Initiation zu erleben, die jetzt nicht die Initiation eines Menschen, sondern die Initiation einer kosmischen Individualität war, wenn man dann noch von Initiation sprechen will, was eigentlich nicht mehr richtig ist. Dadurch wurde das althebräische Volk vorbereitet, das zu empfangen, was an die Stelle der alten Initiation treten sollte: in richtiger Art hinzuschauen auf das Mysterium von Golgatha. Dadurch aber ist auch gegeben, daß die dem alttestamentlichen Volke angehörenden Apostel zunächst kein Verständnis haben für die Worte, welche die Initiation charaktetisieren. Der Christus Jesus spricht von der Initiation, und er drückt sich so aus, daß er sagt: Hineilen zum Tode, drei Tage im Grabe sein, dann auferweckt werden. Das ist die Beschreibung der Initiation. Hätte er diese Beschreibung der Initiation seinen Schülern anders gegeben, so hätten sie ihn verstanden. Weil aber diese Art zu sprechen nicht heimisch war beim alttestamentlichen Volke, deshalb verstanden die Zwölf diese Art der Beschreibung zunächst nicht. Daher werden wir mit Recht darauf hingewiesen, wie die Apostel erstaunt sind und nicht wissen, wovon er redet, als er von dem Leiden und Sterben und Auferwecktwerden des Menschensohnes spricht.
Solche Dinge sind also durchaus im Sinne der historischen Darstellung im Geiste dessen, was geschehen ist. Wenn der alte Initiierte seine Initiation erlebte, da geschah das mit ihm, daß er, während er außerhalb seines Leibes weilte, in einer höheren Welt war, nicht in der Welt des gewöhnlichen Sinnenseins. Er war vereinigt außerhalb des Leibes, man kann sagen, mit den Tatsachen eines höheren Planes. Wenn er dann wieder in seinen Leib zurückkam, was war dann dasjenige, was er in der spirituellen Welt leibfrei erlebt hatte? Erinnerung war es. Er mußte so sprechen, daß er sagen konnte: Ich erinnere mich, wie man sich sonst an das erinnert, was man gestern und vorgestern erlebt hat, an meine Erlebnisse im leibfreien Zustande. Und er konnte für sie zeugen. Zu wesentlich mehr kam es bei den Initiierten nicht, als daß sie in ihrer Seele die Geheimnisse von den spirituellen Welten trugen, wie die Menschenseele die Erlebnisse von gestern als Erinnerung in sich trägt. Und wie die Seele vereinigt ist mit dem, was sie als Erinnerung bewahrt, so trugen die Initiierten in sich die Geheimnisse der spirituellen Welten, waren mit ihnen vereinigt.
Warum war das so? Es war so aus dem Grunde, weil bis zur Zeit des Mysteriums von Golgatha des Menschen Seele auf der Erde überhaupt nicht geeignet war, in das Ich hineinkommen zu lassen die Reiche der Himmel, die übersinnlichen Welten. Sie konnten gar nicht bis zum wirklichen Ich kommen, konnten sich mit dem Ich nicht vereinigen. Nur wenn man über sich selber hinaussah oder hinausahnte durch das Hellsehen, wie es in den alten Zeiten war, wenn man, ich möchte sagen, sich hinausträumte oder durch die Initiation aus dem Ich herauskam, konnte man in die übersinnlichen Welten hineinkommen. Aber innerhalb des Ich gab es kein Verständnis, keine Urteilskraft für die höheren Welten. So war es nun schon einmal. Mit all den Kräften, die zum Ich gehören, konnte sich der Mensch vor dem Mysterium von Golgatha nicht mit den spirituellen Welten vereinigen.
Das war das Geheimnis, das durch die Johannes-Taufe den Leuten klarwerden sollte, daß jetzt die Zeit herangekommen war, wo die Reiche der Himmel bis ins Ich hineinleuchten sollten, bis an das Ich, das Erden-Ich, herankommen sollten. Oh, es war immer wieder und wieder durch die Zeiten hin angedeutet worden, wie eigentlich in den alten Zeiten das, was der Mensch darleben konnte als sein Seelisches, nicht in die übersinnlichen Welten hinaufkommen konnte. Wie eine Disharmonie war es für die alten Zeiten zwischen dem Erleben der eigentlichen menschlichen Heimat, der geistigen Welt, und dem, was, wenn man auch das alte Seelenhafte als Ich bezeichnen will, im menschlichen Innern sich abspielte. Dieses menschliche Innere war abgetrennt von der geistigen Welt; man konnte sich nur in Ausnahmezuständen mit ihr vereinigen. Und wenn alle Gewalt dessen, was später «Ich» werden sollte, was später im Menschen wohnen sollte, wenn alle Gewalt, alle Impulse dieses Ich dennoch einmal die Menschen ausfüllten, sagen wir durch die Initiation oder durch die Erinnerung an eine vorher erlebte Initiation in einer späteren Inkarnation, wenn da die Gewalt des Ich, des noch nicht für die menschliche Leiblichkeit bestimmten Ich, sich hineindrängte als Kraft in die menschliche Leiblichkeit, was geschah dann? Was dann geschah, das wird immer angedeutet: dann hat in den vorchristlichen Zeiten die über die menschliche Leiblichkeit hinausgehende Kraft des Ich sozusagen nicht recht Platz in dem Leibe, durchbricht das, was für das Ich bestimmt ist.
Solche Menschen also, die mehr von der übersinnlichen Welt in sich tragen, die von der übersinnlichen Welt so etwas in sich tragen, was schon in der vorchristlichen Zeit gleichsam an das erinnert, was das Ich später werden soll, die zerbrechen mit dieser Ich-Kraft ihre Leiblichkeit, weil diese Ich-Kraft zu stark ist für die vorchristliche Zeit. Und das wird angedeutet zum Beispiel dadurch, daß bei gewissen Individualitäten in ihrer Verkörperung, wenn sie diese Kraft des Ich in sich haben, dieses Ich nur dadurch in ihnen weilen kann, daß der Leib in irgendeiner Weise verletzt ist oder verletzbar ist, irgendeine leicht verletzbare Stelle hat, die dann auch verletzt wird. Da ist der Mensch durch irgend etwas an sich mehr, als es durch seine übrige Leiblichkeit der Fall ist, der Umgebung ausgesetzt. Wir brauchen uns nur an die Verwundbarkeit des Achill an der Ferse, an die Verwundbarkeit des Siegfried, an Ödipus zu erinnern, wo die Gewalt des Ich die Leiblichkeit durchbricht. Da wird uns angedeutet an dem Vorhandensein der Verwundung, daß nur ein zerbrochener Leib zu der Größe des Ich, zu der übermenschlichen Kraft des Ich paßt, die dadrinnen ist.
Was hiermit eigentlich gesagt werden soll, es kann vielleicht, wenn es in einer anderen Weise formuliert wird, noch ganz bedeutsam vor unsere Seele treten. Nehmen wir an, irgendein Mensch in der vorchristlichen Zeit würde — es braucht nicht mit Bewußtsein zu sein mit allen Impulsen, mit allen Kräften, die später das Ich durchdringen sollen, in sich erfüllt sein und würde mit dieser, man möchte sagen, Über-Ich-Kraft, mit dieser übermenschlichen Kraft untertauchen in seinen Leib. Er müßte diesen Leib zerbrechen und ihn nicht so sehen, wie er ist, wenn das schwache Ich — oder das schwache Innere - dadrinnen ist. Er müßte ihn anders sehen, der Mensch der alten Zeit, der alle Gewalt des Ich in sich dazu gehabt hätte, daß er heraustreten konnte aus seinem Leibe. Er würde ihn so gesehen haben, wie er als zerbrochener Leib ist unter dem Einflusse des Über-Ich, würde ihn mit allerlei Wunden gesehen haben, weil nur das schwache Ich - oder das schwache Innere - in den alten Zeiten den Leib so schwach durchdringt, daß er ganz bleiben kann.
Was ich jetzt gesagt habe, ist bei den Propheten ausgesprochen. Es ist die Stelle ungefähr so formuliert, daß gesagt wird (Sacharja 12,10): Der Mensch, der alle Kraft der Ichheit in sich vereint und sich dem menschlichen Leib gegenüber sieht, er sieht ihn durchstochen, verwundet, mit Löchern. Denn die höhere Kraft des Ich, die in den alten Zeiten noch nicht das menschliche Innere bewohnen konnte, durchlöchert, durchdringt, zersticht den Leib. Das ist ein Impuls, der deshalb durch die Menschheitsevolution läuft, weil wegen des luziferischen und ahrimanischen Einflusses dem Menschen in der vorchristlichen Zeit ein geringeres Quantum seines Ich mitgegeben werden mußte, als das Voll-Ich umfaßt. Und weil der Leib nur geeignet ist für das geringere Quantum und nicht für die ganze Kraft des Ich, deshalb zermürbt er. Und daher mußte — nicht weil es in der vorchristlichen Zeit geschieht, sondern weil mit dem Christus Jesus auf einmal das volle Ich in die Leiblichkeit eingezogen ist, weil da am stärksten die Ichheit eingezogen ist -, deshalb mußte diese Leiblichkeit nicht nur mit einer Wunde, wie es bei so vielen Menschheitsindividualitäten war, die ein Über-Ich getragen haben, sondern mit fünf Wunden angeschaut werden, mit fünf Wunden, die notwendig sind wegen des Hinausragens der Christus-Wesenheit, das heißt des Voll-Ich des Menschen, über die Form der Leiblichkeit, über die angemessene Form der Leiblichkeit. Wegen dieses Hinausragens mußte sich auf dem physischen Plan der Weltgeschichte das Kreuz erheben, das den Christus-Leib so trug, wie der menschliche Leib sein würde, wenn jemals in einem Augenblick die ganze Summe des Menschentums, von welcher der Mensch einen großen Teil durch den luziferischen und ahrimanischen Einfluß verloren hat, in einem Menschen weilen würde.
Das ist ein tiefes Mysterium, das uns aus der Geheimwissenschaft heraus geradezu das Bild auf Golgatha hinstellt. Und wer versteht, was Menschheit und Menschentum ist, was das Erden-Ich ist, was das Verhältnis des Erden-Ich zur Menschenform des Leibes, zur Form des Menschenleibes ist, der weiß, daß bei der vollständigen Durchdringung des Erden-Ich mit dem Menschenleibe nicht die Durchdringung geschehen kann, welche die normale bei dem herumwandelnden Menschen ist, sondern daß der Mensch, wenn er aus sich herausgeht und, sich selber anschauend, fragen kann: Wie müßte dieser Leib sein, wenn alle Ichheit in ihn hineinrücken würde? - ihn anschauen würde mit fünf Wunden. Aus der Menschennatur und aus der Erdenwesenheit selber folgt die Gestalt des Kreuzes mit dem Christus und den Wunden auf Golgatha. Bis in das Bild hinein kann sich aus der Betrachtung der Menschennatur das Mysterium von Golgatha aus dem ergeben, was man wissen kann. Das ist das Eigentümliche, daß es eine Möglichkeit gibt, nicht nur im Hellsehen, wo es sich als natürlich erweist, hinzuschauen, wie das Kreuz auf Golgatha erhöht ist, wie die Kreuzigung stattfindet, und die Wahrheit dieses historischen Ereignisses zu schauen, sondern daß es eine Möglichkeit gibt, daß wir durch das Mysterium von Golgatha sogar die menschliche Vernunft so weit heranbringen an das Mysterium von Golgatha, daß, wenn man fein genug, scharf genug diese menschliche Vernunft gebraucht, diese sich umwandelt in Imagination, in Einbildung, die aber dann Wahrheit enthält, wodurch dann, wenn man versteht, was der Christus ist und wie er sich zur Form des Menschenleibes verhält, die menschliche Phantasie so geleitet wird, daß das Bild auf Golgatha selber entsteht. So waren vielfach die älteren christlichen Maler geleitet, die nicht etwa immer Hellseher waren, sondern aus der Kraft der Erkenntnis des Mysteriums von Golgatha bis zu dem Bilde von Golgatha getrieben wurden, so daß sie es malen konnten. Es ist eben in jenem großen Wendepunkt der Menschheitsevolution aus dem Hellsehen herangebracht worden an die Ich-Seele des Menschen das Verständnis für die Christus-Wesenheit, das heißt für das Ur-Ich des Menschen.
Das Hellsehen macht möglich, außerhalb des Leibes das Mysterium von Golgatha zu schauen. Wodurch? Wenn ein Verhältnis zum Mysterium von Golgatha innerhalb des Leibes eingegangen ist, so ist es auch heute möglich, in den höheren Welten das Mysterium von Golgatha und damit die volle Bekräftigung dieses großen Knotenpunktes der Menschheitsevolution zu schauen. Aber es ist auch ein Begreifen dieses Mysteriums von Golgatha möglich, und in den Worten, die ich eben gesprochen habe, sollte die Möglichkeit eines Begreifens gegeben sein. Freilich muß man lange meditieren, muß lange nachdenken über das, was gesagt worden ist. Und wenn jemand das Gefühl hat, was jetzt gesagt worden ist, sei schwer verständlich, so darf das als berechtigt bezeichnet werden; denn selbstverständlich gehört das, was die Menschenseele hinführen kann zu dem vollen Verständnis des Größten, des Höchsten, des Bedeutsamsten, das auf der Erde geschehen ist, zu den schwierigsten Dingen. In einer gewissen Weise sollten die Jünger dazu hingeführt werden; und von diesen wieder, die nach und nach herangebracht werden sollten zu einem neuen Verständnis der Menschheitsevolution, erwiesen sich eben als die brauchbarsten Petrus, Jakobus und Johannes.
Es ist gut, den bedeutsamen Zeitabschnitt, der da in der Zeit des Mysteriums von Golgatha eingetreten ist, sich von den verschiedensten Seiten vor Augen zu halten. Deshalb ja ist es auch so dankenswert, daß Sie heute morgen die Hegelsche Darstellung dieses Zeitpunktes haben hören können. Alle Dinge, die menschliches Begreifen geben kann, können nämlich zusammenströmen, um das Bedeutsamste zu begreifen, das damals, heranreifend in den vorhergehenden Jahrhunderten, sich vollziehend um die Zeit des Mysteriums von Golgatha und dann die weitere Menschheitsevolution langsam vorbereitend und bedingend, eingetreten ist. Es ist an verschiedenen Orten der Erde eingetreten. Wir können nicht nur in Palästina, wo das Ereignis von Golgatha selber geschehen ist, die Sachen verfolgen, sondern wir können sie verfolgen, wenn wir in der richtigen Weise vorgehen, auch an anderen Punkten der Erde; nur spielte sich da nicht das Ereignis von Golgatha ab. Aber das Absteigen und das Wiederaufsteigen der Menschheit, das Sichemporheben der Menschheit durch die Wirkung des Mysteriums von Golgatha, das sich über die westliche Welt verbreitete, können wir verfolgen. Namentlich das Herabsteigen können wir verfolgen, und es ist interessant, wie wir das Herabsteigen der Menschheit verfolgen können.
Nehmen wir den griechischen Boden noch einmal und fassen wir ins Auge, wie ein halbes Jahrtausend, bevor das Ereignis von Golgatha sich vollzog, die Ereignisse sich abspielten. Drüben im Morgenlande, wo der Krishna aufgetreten ist, war man in einer gewissen Weise der damaligen Zeit voraus. Man war voraus sozusagen in der Epoche des Niedergehens des alten Hellsehens. Es ist etwas Eigentümliches um diese Kultur gerade zum Beispiel Indiens. Während in der unmittelbar nachatlantischen Zeit in Indien die erste große nachatlantische Kulturblüte auftritt und in der reinsten Weise - für die menschliche Seele reinsten Weise - ein Hineinschauen in die geistige Welt noch da war, das sich bei den Rishis verband mit einer wunderbaren Möglichkeit, das Geschaute darzustellen, so daß es auf die späteren Zeiträume wirken konnte, und dann, als das Hellsehen verschwand, in solchen bedeutenden Offenbarungen, wie es die Krishna-Offenbarung ist, aufbewahrt wurde für die späteren Zeiten, war das, was eigentliches Hellsehen war, am Ende des dritten Zeitraumes schon erloschen. Aber durch Krishna und seine Schüler waren die Tatsachen, die man schauen konnte, in wunderbare Worte gebracht und aufbewahrt, so daß man in der Schrift das hatte, was früher gesehen worden ist. Das trat eigentlich für Indien niemals ein, was weiter westlich, zum Beispiel in Griechenland, eingetreten ist.
Wenn wir so recht die indische Welt ins Auge fassen, können wir sagen: Es erlischt das alte Hellsehen; dafür schreiben nieder in wunderbaren Worten diejenigen, von denen Krishna der Bedeutendste ist, was einstmals geschaut worden ist. Das ist dann da im Wort, im Veda. Und wer sich in das Wort vertieft, erlebt in seiner Seele davon den Nachklang. Aber nicht das entsteht, was in Sokrates zum Beispiel oder in anderen Philosophen entstanden ist. Das, was man westliche Vernunft, westliche Urteilskraft nennen kann, das tritt nicht in den indischen Seelen auf. Wovon wir heute im eminentesten Sinne sprechen, wenn wir von der ureigenen Kraft des Ich sprechen, das tritt gar nicht einmal in Indien auf. Daher macht sich sogleich etwas anderes geltend, als das alte Hellsehen verglommen war: der Drang nach Yoga, dem schulgerechten Hinaufkommen in die Welten, die auf natürliche Weise verloren worden sind. Und Yoga wird ein künstliches Hellsehen. Und im Grunde genommen tritt an die Stelle des alten Hellsehens sogleich die Yoga-Philosophie, ohne daß dazwischen das ist, was zum Beispiel in der griechischen, rein vernunftgemäßen Philosophie auftritt. Das tritt für das Indertum gar nicht ein. Diese Zwischenphase ist gar nicht vorhanden. Und wenn wir die Vedantaphilosophie des Vyasa nehmen, können wir sagen: Nicht so ist sie ausgeprägt, wie die westlichen Weltanschauungen lehren, von Ideen durchzogen, von Vernunft durchzogen, sondern sie ist gleichsam noch heruntergeholt aus den höheren Welten, aber in menschliche Worte gebracht; das ist das Eigentümliche: nicht mit menschlichen Begriffen errungen, nicht ausgedacht wie das sokratische, das platonische Element, sondern hellseherisch erschaut.
Es ist schwer, sich ganz über diese Dinge klarzuwerden; aber es gibt eine Möglichkeit, auch heute diesen Unterschied zu erleben. Nehmen Sie irgendein Philosophiebuch, irgendeine Darstellung eines philosophischen Systems der westlichen Philosophie in die Hand. Was heute ernsthaft als Philosophie bezeichnet werden kann, wie ist es meistens errungen? Wenn Sie in die Werkstätte eines Menschen, der als ernster Philosoph bezeichnet werden kann, hineinschauen, so können Sie sehen, wie durch Anstrengung der logischen Urteilskraft, des logischen Denkens diese Systeme gewonnen sind. Das alles ist nach und nach gebildet. Und die, welche so Philosophie machen, können eigentlich nicht verstehen, daß man das, was sie da von Begriff zu Begriff weben, in gewisser Beziehung auch hellseherisch schauen kann, daß man das hellseherisch vor sich hat. Daher ein so schwieriges Sichverständlichmachen, wenn man, man möchte sagen, mit einem Schlage gewisse Philosopheme, die sonst «im Schweiße des Angesichts» von Idee zu Idee gewoben werden, hellseherisch überschaut und nicht nötig hat, alle die einzelnen Gedankenschritte zu machen. So gleichsam hellseherisch geschaute Begriffe sind die Begriffe der Vedantaphilosophie. Sie sind nicht im Schweiße des Angesichts nach dem Beispiel der europäischen Philosophen erworben, sondern hellseherisch heruntergebracht, sind eben die letzten Überreste, die in die abstrakten Begriffe hinein verdünnten Reste des alten Hellsehens oder die ersten durch Yoga errungenen, noch dünnen Eroberungen in der übersinnlichen Welt.
Anderes aber haben die mehr westlich wohnenden Menschen durchgemacht. Da blicken wir auf eigenartige, wichtige innere Geschehnisse der Menschheitsevolution. Nehmen wir einen merkwürdigen Philosophen des sechsten Jahrhunderts der vorchristlichen Zeitrechnung: Pherekydes von Syros. Ein merkwürdiger Philosoph! Ein Philosoph, den die heutigen Philosophen nicht als Philosophen gelten lassen. Es gibt heute Philosophiebücher, die sagen das tatsächlich. Ich zitiere da zwei Worte wörtlich: Nun ja, das ist alles kindliche Schilderung, kindliche Symbole; «kindlich und genial» sagt einer heute, der sich ganz besonders erhaben dünkt über jenen alten Philosophen. Also ein halbes Jahrtausend vor der christlichen Zeitrechnung taucht da in Syros ein merkwürdiger Denker auf. Allerdings stellt er anders dar als die übrigen Denker, die man dann später Philosophen nennt. Pherekydes von Syros sagt zum Beispiel: Es liegt dem, was man in der Welt sieht, ein Dreifaches zugrunde: Chronos, Zeus, Chthon. Aus Chronos gehen hervor das luftige, das feurige und das wässerige Element. Und mit alledem, was aus diesen drei Mächten hervorgeht, kommt eine Art Schlangenwesenheit in Streit, Ophioneus. - Alles, was er schildert, man kann es, wenn man seiner Schilderung auch ohne Hellsehen, sondern nur mit etwas Phantasie begabt, nachgeht, vor sich sehen: Chronos, nicht nur als die abstrakt verfließende Zeit, sondern als Wesenheit, als wirkliche Wesenheit, erschaubar gestaltet; ebenso Zeus, den unendlichen Äther, als die in sich belebte Allwesenheit; Chthon, dasjenige, wodurch das sonst Himmlische irdisch wird, was das im Raume auseinander Gewobene zusammenzieht im Planeten Erde, um ein irdisches Dasein zu haben; das alles sich irdisch abspielend; dann, sich hineinmischend wie ein feindliches Element, eine Art Schlangenwesenheit. Wenn man dem nachgeht, was da der merkwürdige Pherckydes von Syros schildert, so braucht man Geistesforschung, um das zu verstehen; denn er ist ein letzter Nachzügler des alten Hellsehens. Er sieht die Welt der Ursachen hinter der Sinneswelt und beschreibt diese Ursachen mit seinem hellseherischen Vermögen. Das gefällt natürlich denen, die nur in Begriffen wirtschaften, gar nicht. Er schaut das lebendige Weben der guten Götter und das Hineinspielen der feindlichen Mächte, die er schildert, wie man sie hellseherisch schaut. Er sieht, wie geboren werden aus Chronos, aus der realen Zeit, die Elemente.
Da haben wir also in diesem Philosophen Pherekydes von Syros einen Mann, der noch mit seiner Seele hineinschaut in die Welt, die das hellseherische Bewußtsein erschließt, und sie beschreibt, eine Beschreibung, der man nachgehen kann. So steht er noch in der westlichen Welt da im sechsten Jahrhundert der vorchristlichen Zeitrechnung. Thales, Anaximenes, Anaximander, Heraklit, die fast seine Zeitgenossen sind, stehen schon anders da. Da kommen wirklich zwei Welten ineinander. Aber wie sieht es in ihren Seelen aus? Ausgelöscht, gelähmt ist das alte Hellsehen in ihnen. Höchstens noch die Sehnsucht nach diesen geistigen Welten ist da. Und was erleben sie an der Stelle, wo ein Rest des alten Schauens bei dem Weisen von Syros noch da war, wo er noch hineingeschaut hat in die elementarische Welt der Ursachen? Die ist ihnen bereits verschlossen. Da sehen sie nicht mehr hinein. Es ist so, wie wenn sich gerade diese Welt vor ihnen verschlieBen wollte, wie wenn sie halb noch da wäre für sie und doch sich wieder ihnen entzöge, so daß sie abstrakte Begriffe, die dem Ich angehöen, an die Stelle des alten Hellsehens setzen. So schaut es aus in diesen Seelen. Das ist ein sehr merkwürdiger Seelenzustand in den westlichen Seelen. Das ist jener Seelenzustand, der hinarbeitet nach Vernunft, nach Urteilskraft, die gerade das Ich auszeichnen sollen. An einzelnen Seelen sehen wir es, so zum Beispiel, wenn Heraklit noch das lebendig webende Feuer, man möchte sagen, mit einem letzten Anflug von richtigem hellseherischem Schauen als die Ursache aller Dinge schildert; Thales das Wasser, aber nicht das physisch-sinnliche Wasser, wie Heraklit auch nicht das physisch-sinnliche Feuer meint, sondern es ist noch etwas von der elementarischen Welt, die sie halb noch sehen, während sie sich ihnen halb entzieht und sie abstrakte Begriffe geben müssen. Da blicken wir hinein in diese Seelen und da verstehen wir, wie bis in unsere Zeit hinein noch etwas nachklingen konnte von der Stimmung dieser Seelen.
Wenn unsere Zeitgenossen nur nicht oftmals gar so gedankenlos über manche Dinge hinweglesen wollten! Über eine Stelle bei Nietzsche, die einen tief erfassen, ergreifen, erschüttern kann, liest man leicht heute hinweg. Sie steht in der nachgelassenen Schrift «Die Philosophie im tragischen Zeitalter der Griechen», worin er Thales, Anaximander, Heraklit, Parmenides, Anaxagoras und Empedokles schildert. Da ist eine Stelle gleich im Anfange - man muß sie nachfühlen -, da hat Nietzsche etwas von dem empfunden, was in den Seelen dieser ersten griechischen einsamen Denker erlebt worden war. Lesen Sie die Stelle bei Nietzsche nach, wo er sagt: Wie mag es gewesen sein in den Seelen dieser philosophischen Heroengestalten, welche den Übergang finden mußten aus der Zeit des lebendigen Anschauens - von dem auch er nichts mehr wußte, das er aber ahnte -, als die alte Lebendigkeit in den Seelen abgelöst wurde durch die abstrakten, trockenen, nüchternen Begriffe, wo das «Sein», dieses nüchterne, trockene, abstrakte, kalte Sein als Begriff trat an die Stelle der vollen Lebendigkeit, die das hellseherische Bewußtsein hatte? Und Nietzsche empfindet: Es ist, wie wenn das Blut einem erstarrte, wenn man übergeht aus der Welt der Lebendigkeit in die Welt der Begriffe bei Thales oder Heraklit, wenn diese Leute Begriffe von «Sein» und «Werden» brauchen, so daß man sich aus dem warmen Werden in die Eisregion der Begriffe versetzt fühlt.
In jenes Zeitalter muß man sich hineinversetzt fühlen, in dem diese Menschen standen, muß empfinden, wie sie beim Herannahen des Mysteriums von Golgatha dastanden, muß sich in sie so hineinfühlen, daß man empfindet, wie noch in ihnen ein dunkler Nachklang der alten Zeiten ist, sie aber so dastehen, daß sie sich begnügen müssen mit dem, was abstrakte Urteilskraft im menschlichen Ich ist, was früher gar nicht dazusein brauchte. Und während in der Folgezeit die Begriffswelt immer reicher und reicher wurde, konnten in der ersten Zeit, als die Begriffswelt herankam, die griechischen Philosophen nur die allereinfachsten Begriffe erfassen. Wie quälen sie sich mit den Begriffen, mit dem abstrakten «Sein»; wie quälen sich zum Beispiel die Philosophen der eleatischen Schule mit dem abstrakten «Sein»! So bereitet sich vor, was die eigentlichen abstrakten Eigenschaften des Ich sind.
Jetzt denken wir uns eine solche Seele, welche da im Westen steht, präpariert ist zu dieser Mission des Westens, die aber noch in sich trägt die stärksten Nachklänge an das alte Hellsehen. In Indien sind diese Nachklänge längst verglommen; im Westen sind sie noch da. Der Trieb der Seele will hinein in die elementarische Welt, aber das Bewußtsein kann nicht. Eine Stimmung wie die Buddha-Stimmung konnte in diesen Seelen nicht entstehen. Die Buddha-Stimmung würde gesagt haben: Wir sind hinausversetzt in die Welt des Leidens; also machen wir uns frei von ihr. Nein, die westlichen Seelen wollten etwas erfassen von dem, was vor ihnen war. In das, was hinter ihnen war, konnten sie nicht hinein; in der Welt vor ihnen hatten sie nur die kalten, eisigen Begriffe. Denken wir uns eine solche Seele wie den Pherekydes von Syros. Er ist der, welcher als der letzte hineinschauen konnte in das, was da drinnen ist in der elementarischen Welt. Denken wir uns eine der anderen Seelen aber. Sie kann nicht sehen, wie die Elemente lebendig geboren werden aus dem Chronos heraus.Sie kann nicht sehen, daß das Schlangenwesen Ophioneus den Streit beginnt mit den oberen Göttern; aber im Bilde hält sie fest, daß da etwas hereinwirkt in das Sinnliche. Sie sieht nicht hindurch auf Chronos; aber das sieht sie, was als Abdruck in der Sinneswelt aus Chronos hervorgeht: Feuer, Wasser, Luft und Erde. Sie sieht nicht, wie die oberen Götter von den unteren bekämpft werden, wie sich der Schlangengott Luzifer empört; aber sie sieht, wie Disharmonie und Harmonie, Freundschaft und Feindschaft walten. Liebe und Haß sieht sie als abstrakte Begriffe, Feuer, Wasser, Luft und Erde als abstrakte Elemente. Was jetzt noch in die Seele hereindringt, das sieht sie; aber was früher von den Zeitgenossen gesehen worden war, das ist zugedeckt.
Denken wir uns eine solche Seele, die noch ganz drinnensteht in dem Lebendigen der früheren Zeit, aber nicht hineinschauen kann in die geistige Welt, die nur erfassen kann das äußere Abbild, bei der zugedeckt ist - wegen ihrer besonderen Mission - dasjenige, was vorher die Menschen beglückt hat; auf der anderen Seite hat sie aber von der neuen Ich-Welt nichts anderes als ein paar Begriffe, an denen sie sich festhalten muß, dann haben wir die Seele des Ermpedokles. Denn so steht die Seele des Empedokles vor uns, wenn wir ihr Innerstes erfassen wollen. Fast Zeitgenosse des Weisen von Syros ist Empedokles. Kaum zwei drittel Jahrhunderte später lebt er. Aber ganz anders ist seine Seele beschaffen. Den Übergang mußte sie vollziehen über den Rubikon von dem alten Hellsehen zu dem abstrakten Begreifen des Ich. Da sehen wir, wie auf einmal zwei Welten zusammenstoßen. Da sehen wir, wie das Ich hereindämmert und seiner Erfüllung entgegengeht. Da sehen wir die Seelen der alten griechischen Philosophen, die dazu verurteilt waren, zuerst das aufzunehmen, was wir jetzt Vernunft, Logik nennen; da sehen wit, wie ihre Seelen ausgeleert waren von den alten Offenbarungen. Und in diese Seelen mußte hineingegossen werden der neue Impuls, der Impuls von Golgatha.
So waren die Seelen beschaffen, als dieser Impuls heraufkam. Aber sie mußten lechzen nach einer neuen Erfüllung. Dann nur konnten sie ihn verstehen. Für das indische Denken ist fast kein Übergang, der sich vergleichen ließe mit dem, was wir bei den einsamen griechischen Denkern haben. Daher bietet die indische Philosophie, die gleich den Übergang zur Yoga-Lehre gemacht hat, kaum eine Möglichkeit, den Übergang zu finden zu dem Mysterium von Golgatha. Die griechische Philosophie ist so vorbereitet, daß sie lechzt nach dem Mysterium von Golgatha. Sehen Sie sich die Gnosis an, wie sie in ihrer Philosophie verlangt nach dem Mysterium von Golgatha. Auf griechischem Boden ersteht die Philosophie des Mysteriums von Golgatha, weil die besten der Griechenseelen lechzten nach der Aufnahme des Impulses von Golgatha.
Man muß guten Willen haben, um zu verstehen, was in der Menschheitsevolution geschah; dann, möchte man sagen, verspürt man etwas von dem, was man nennen könnte: es ist wie ein Ruf und ein Gegenruf auf dem Boden der Erde. Wir schauen nach Griechenland, wir schauen weiter nach Sizilien in solche Seelen, von denen Empedokles eine ganz besonders hervorragende ist, und wir vernehmen einen merkwürdigen Ruf. Wie können wir uns ihn charakterisieren? Wie sprechen solche Seelen? Etwa so — schauen wir hinein in die Empedokles-Seele -: Ich weiß historisch von der Initiation. Ich weiß historisch, daß durch die Initiation hineingingen in die Menschenseele die übersinnlichen Welten. Allein jetzt ist ein anderes Zeitalter gekommen. Die Initiation kann nicht mehr unmittelbar lebendig werden. Die Menschenseele ist in ein anderes Stadium eingerückt. Wir brauchen, hineinreichend in das Ich, einen neuen Impuls. Wo bist du, Impuls, der an die Stelle der alten Initiation treten kann, die wir nicht mehr erleben können, der vor das neue Ich hinstellt dasselbe Geheimnis, das das alte Hellsehen enthielt? - Und darauf antwortet der andere Ruf, der von Golgatha kommt: Herausholen durfte ich, indem ich mich | den Göttern fügte und nicht den Menschen, die Geheimnisse der Mysterien und sie hinstellen vor die ganze Menschheit, damit vor der ganzen Menschheit dasteht, was sonst in den Tiefen der Mysterien gestanden hat.
Wie die Frage der westlichen Welt nach einer neuen Lösung des Weltenrätsels, so erscheint uns das, was zum Beispiel im Süden von Europa in den Griechenseelen geboren worden ist. Und wie die Antwort - die aber nur nach dem Westen hin verstanden werden kann erscheint uns der große Monolog des Gottes, von dem wir am Schlusse des gestrigen Vortrages gesprochen haben und von dem wir morgen weiter sprechen wollen.
Seventh Lecture
It would undoubtedly be best if, when considering one or another of the Gospels, one could always disregard the other Gospels entirely; for this would lead to the purest and best understanding of the basic tone of the individual Gospel. However, it is obvious that such an approach—if one does not cast one ray of light from one Gospel onto the others—can easily give rise to misunderstandings. For example, what was described yesterday as the “greatest monologue in world history” could easily be misunderstood if someone were to consult, not precisely but rather superficially, what must be said about the similar passage in the Gospel of Matthew, for example, and what was also said at the time during the lectures in Bern. An objection made from such a point of view would, in a deeper logical sense, be the same as if there were a statement saying: Here on this podium once stood a man, and to his left stood a bouquet of roses – and another time one would read: Here on this podium once stood a man, and to his right stood a bouquet of roses — and if someone who had not been there said: That is not true; for once the bouquet of roses stood on the right, and another time it stood on the left. It depends on where the observer in question was standing; then both statements are correct. That is how one must take the Gospels. We are not dealing with an abstract biography of Jesus Christ, but with a rich world of external as well as occult facts that are presented here.
To consider this point of view, let us now take what was called yesterday the “greatest monologue in world history,” the soliloquy of God. We must be clear that what took place in the course of the whole event occurred quite particularly between Christ Jesus and his disciples, his closest followers. And what was said yesterday, that after being freed from the physical body of John the Baptist, the spirit of Elijah was actually active as a kind of group soul of the disciples, must be taken into account in such a consideration. What happened at that time did not take place in such a way that it can simply be recounted in an external manner, but in a much more complicated way. There was, so to speak, an inner and profound interrelationship between the soul of Christ and the souls of the Twelve. What took place in the soul of Christ were, for that time, all meaningful events, events of a rich nature, manifold events. But everything that happened in the soul of Christ was repeated, as it were, in a kind of mirror image, in a kind of reflection, in the souls of the disciples, but divided into twelve parts; so that each of the Twelve experienced a part of what was happening in the soul of Christ Jesus as in a mirror image, but each of the Twelve experienced something different.
What took place in the soul of Christ Jesus took place like a great harmony, like a great symphony, which was reflected in the soul of each of the Twelve in the same way as one of twelve instruments can produce. Therefore, every event that relates particularly to one or more of the disciples can be described from two sides. One can describe how the event in question appears in the soul of Christ, for example, what yesterday was presented as the great world-historical monologue of Christ Jesus; one can describe how it took place there, how it was experienced there. There it appears just as it was presented yesterday. But in a certain mirror image it also takes place in the soul of Peter. The same soul experience takes place in Peter. But while it takes up the whole of humanity in Christ Jesus, the same thing happens in Peter in such a way that it is one-twelfth of the whole of humanity, one-twelfth or one sign of the zodiac of the whole Christ Spirit. Therefore, one must portray it in a different way when portraying it in relation to Christ Jesus himself.
This is how one must speak when depicting it in the sense of the Gospel of Mark, for in this Gospel the striking things are depicted, and what took place in the soul of Christ Jesus himself is depicted in a very special way. In the Gospel of Matthew, on the other hand, what is depicted relates more to the soul of Peter and what Christ Jesus can contribute to the explanation of what is taking place in Peter's soul. Read the Gospel carefully, and you will see how the Gospel of Matthew, in words that have been specially added, presents the account from Peter's point of view. For why are the words added there: “Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven”? (Matthew 16:17) In other words, something of what the soul of Christ Jesus felt is also felt by the soul of Peter. But because Peter's soul feels that his master is Christ, this is to be interpreted as meaning that Peter is lifted up for a while to an experience in the higher self and is overwhelmed by what he experiences in this way, and so to speak falls back again. Nevertheless, he was able to penetrate to the knowledge that was taking place in the soul of Christ with a different intention, with a different goal. And because he was able to do this, he was able to receive the transfer of the power of the keys, which is mentioned in the Gospel of Matthew (Matthew 16:19) and which was also spoken of in the explanation of the Gospel of Matthew. In contrast, in the Gospel of Mark, we have only emphasized strongly and uniquely those words which indicate that the event, apart from what it was in Peter, took place simultaneously, parallel to the monologue of God.
This is how we must take these things. But then we also feel how Christ Jesus actually proceeds with his own, how he leads them from stage to stage, how, after the spirit of Elijah-John has passed over to them, he can lead them further in the understanding of spiritual mysteries than he could lead them before. And then we feel for the first time the significance of the fact that the scene we discussed yesterday at the end as the monologue of God is followed by the so-called Transfiguration or Transfiguration scene. This is again an important element in the dramatic composition of the Gospel of Mark. In order to shed light on this transfiguration, we must point out a few things that are connected with much that is necessary for understanding the account in the Gospels; first of all, one thing.
You can read often in the Gospel of Mark and also in the other Gospels how Christ Jesus speaks of how the Son of Man must suffer greatly, that he will be attacked by the scribes and the high priests, that he will be killed, and that he will be raised from the dead after three days. And everywhere, up to a certain point, you find clear indications that the apostles initially cannot understand this expression about the suffering, dying, and resurrected Son of Man, that they have difficulty understanding this passage in particular (9:31-32). Why do we encounter this peculiar fact? Why do the apostles have difficulties precisely in understanding the actual mystery of Golgotha? What is this mystery of Golgotha? We have already mentioned it. It is nothing other than bringing initiation out of the depths of the mysteries onto the stage of world history. Of course, there is a very significant difference between any initiation and the mystery of Golgotha. The difference lies in the following.
Those who had been initiated into the mysteries of various peoples had, in a certain sense, gone through the same thing. They were brought to suffering, to a three-day, one might say apparent death, where their spirit dwelt outside their body in the spiritual worlds, where their spirit was then brought back into their body so that the spirit in the body could remember what it had gone through in the spiritual world and could act as a messenger for the secrets of the spiritual world. So you could say that going to death, though not to the death that completely separates the spirit from the physical body, but only separates it for a time, is initiation. Remaining outside the body and returning to the physical body, thereby becoming a messenger of divine mysteries, is initiation. It took place after careful preparation, after the person concerned had reached a state in which the forces of the soul were so concentrated within him that he could live for three and a half days without using the instruments of his physical body. But then, after these three and a half days, he had to reunite with his physical body. He had thus undergone, so to speak, a rapture into a higher world, apart from ordinary historical events.
Different in its inner nature, but similar in its outward appearance, was the mystery of Golgotha. The events that took place during Christ's sojourn in the body of Jesus of Nazareth led to the actual physical death of the physical body of Jesus of Nazareth, to the Spirit of Christ remaining outside the physical body for three days, but then returning, not to the physical body, but to the condensed etheric body, so condensed that the disciples could perceive him, as described in the Gospels; so that Christ could walk and become visible even after the events of Golgotha. Thus, the initiation, which had otherwise taken place in the depths of the mysteries, hidden from the outer eyes, was presented as a historical event, as a unique event before the whole of humanity. In a certain sense, the initiation was thus brought out of the mysteries and accomplished before everyone's eyes through the one Christ. But this also marks the end of the old world and the beginning of the new age.
From the description given by the prophets, you have seen that the spirit of prophecy and what was given to the ancient Hebrew people through this spirit was different from the spirit of initiation of other peoples. The other peoples had leaders who were initiates, who were initiated as has just been described. This was not the case with the ancient Hebrew people. Here we are not dealing with initiations as with other peoples, but, as we have heard, with an elementary emergence of the spirit in the bodies of those who appeared as prophets, with something that emerges as geniuses of spirituality. And in order for this to be possible, we see that the middle prophets are souls who, in earlier incarnations, were initiates among other peoples, so that they can give to the ancient Hebrew people what they received in initiation as a kind of memory. Thus, the illumination of spiritual life was different among the Old Testament people and different among other peoples. Among the latter, it came about through action, through initiation; among the Old Testament people, it came through the gifts implanted in those who were working among the people as prophets.
Through the work of their prophets, the ancient Hebrew people were prepared to experience that unique initiation, which was now no longer the initiation of a human being, but the initiation of a cosmic individuality, if one still wants to speak of initiation, which is actually no longer correct. This prepared the ancient Hebrew people to receive what was to take the place of the old initiation: to look in the right way at the mystery of Golgotha. But this also means that the apostles belonging to the Old Testament people initially had no understanding of the words that characterize initiation. Christ Jesus speaks of initiation, and he expresses it by saying: rushing to death, being in the tomb for three days, then being raised up. That is the description of initiation. If he had given his disciples a different description of initiation, they would have understood him. But because this way of speaking was not familiar to the people of the Old Testament, the Twelve did not understand this kind of description at first. Therefore, we are rightly reminded of how astonished the apostles were and did not know what he was talking about when he spoke of the suffering, death, and resurrection of the Son of Man.
Such things are therefore entirely in keeping with the historical account in the spirit of what happened. When the ancient initiate experienced his initiation, what happened to him was that while he was outside his body, he was in a higher world, not in the world of ordinary sensory perception. He was united outside the body, one might say, with the realities of a higher plane. When he then returned to his body, what was it that he had experienced in the spiritual world without a body? It was memory. He had to speak in such a way that he could say: I remember, as one otherwise remembers what one experienced yesterday and the day before yesterday, my experiences in the body-less state. And he could bear witness to them. The initiates did not achieve anything more than to carry the secrets of the spiritual worlds in their souls, just as the human soul carries yesterday's experiences within itself as memories. And just as the soul is united with what it preserves as memory, so the initiates carried the secrets of the spiritual worlds within themselves and were united with them.
Why was this so? It was so because, until the time of the Mystery of Golgotha, the human soul on earth was not at all suited to allow the realms of the heavens, the supersensible worlds, to enter into the I. They could not reach the real I at all, could not unite with the I. Only when one looked beyond oneself or sensed beyond oneself through clairvoyance, as was the case in ancient times, when one, I might say, dreamed oneself out or came out of the ego through initiation, could one enter the supersensible worlds. But within the ego there was no understanding, no power of judgment for the higher worlds. That was how it was. With all the powers belonging to the ego, human beings could not unite with the spiritual worlds before the mystery of Golgotha.
That was the secret that was to become clear to people through the baptism of John, that now the time had come when the realms of heaven were to shine into the ego, were to reach the ego, the earthly ego. Oh, it had been hinted at again and again throughout the ages how, in ancient times, what man could experience as his soul life could not ascend into the supersensible worlds. In ancient times, there was a kind of disharmony between the experience of the actual human home, the spiritual world, and what took place within the human being, even if one wants to call the old soul life the “I.” This human inner life was separated from the spiritual world; one could only unite with it in exceptional states. And when all the power of what was later to become the “I” , what was later to dwell in human beings, when all the power, all the impulses of this I nevertheless filled human beings, let us say through initiation or through the memory of a previously experienced initiation in a later incarnation, when the power of the I, the I not yet destined for human physicality, forced its way into human physicality as a force, what happened then? What happened then is always hinted at: in pre-Christian times, the power of the I that transcended human physicality did not really have a place in the body, so to speak, and broke through what was intended for the I.
Such people, therefore, who carry more of the supersensible world within themselves, who carry within themselves something from the supersensible world that already in pre-Christian times was reminiscent of what the ego was later to become, break their physicality with this ego force because this ego force is too strong for pre-Christian times. This is indicated, for example, by the fact that in certain individuals, when they have this ego force within them, this ego can only dwell in them if the body is injured in some way or is vulnerable, has some easily injured spot that is then also injured. Through something in themselves, human beings are more exposed to their environment than is the case through their physicality alone. We need only remember the vulnerability of Achilles' heel, the vulnerability of Siegfried, Oedipus, where the power of the ego breaks through physicality. The existence of the wound suggests to us that only a broken body is compatible with the greatness of the ego, with the superhuman power of the ego that lies within.
What is actually meant here may, if formulated in a different way, still be very significant for our soul. Let us assume that some person in pre-Christian times was filled with all the impulses and forces that were later to permeate the ego, without necessarily being conscious of them, and that this person submerged himself in his body with this, one might say, super-ego force, this superhuman force. He would have to break this body and not see it as it is when the weak ego — or the weak inner being — is inside it. He would have to see it differently, the person of ancient times, who would have had all the power of the ego within himself to be able to step out of his body. He would have seen it as a broken body under the influence of the superego, would have seen it with all kinds of wounds, because only the weak ego—or the weak inner self—in ancient times penetrates the body so weakly that it can remain whole.
What I have just said is expressed by the prophets. It is formulated in Zechariah 12:10, where it says: The man who unites all the power of the ego within himself and sees himself facing the human body sees it pierced, wounded, full of holes. For the higher power of the ego, which in ancient times could not yet dwell in the human inner being, pierces, penetrates, and destroys the body. This is an impulse that runs through human evolution because, due to the Luciferic and Ahrimanic influences, human beings in pre-Christian times had to be given a lesser quantum of their ego than the full ego encompasses. And because the body is only suitable for the lesser quantum and not for the whole power of the ego, it wears it down. And therefore — not because it happens in pre-Christian times, but because with Christ Jesus the full ego entered the physical body at once, because the ego entered most strongly there — therefore this physicality had to be regarded not only with one wound, as was the case with so many human individualities who carried a super-ego, but with five wounds, with five wounds that are necessary because of the protrusion of the Christ-being, that is, of the full ego of the human being, beyond the form of physicality, beyond the appropriate form of physicality. Because of this protrusion, the cross had to rise on the physical plane of world history, carrying the Christ body as the human body would be if, in a single moment, the entire sum of humanity, of which man has lost a large part through the influence of Lucifer and Ahriman, were to dwell in one human being.
This is a profound mystery that the secret science presents to us in the image of Golgotha. And anyone who understands what humanity and human nature are, what the earthly I is, what the relationship of the earthly I is to the human form of the body, to the form of the human body, knows that when the earthly ego completely permeates the human body, the permeation that is normal in a walking human being cannot take place, but that when a human being steps outside of himself and, looking at himself, asks: What would this body be like if all my ego were to move into it? — he would see it with five wounds. The form of the cross with Christ and the wounds on Golgotha follows from human nature and from the nature of the earth itself. From contemplating human nature, the mystery of Golgotha can emerge in the image itself, from what can be known. This is the peculiar thing, that there is a possibility not only in clairvoyance, where it proves natural to look at how the cross is raised on Golgotha, how the crucifixion takes place, and to see the truth of this historical event, but that there is a possibility that through the mystery of Golgotha we can even bring human reason so far to the mystery of Golgotha that, if one uses this human reason finely enough, sharply enough, it transforms itself into imagination, into imagination that contains truth, whereby, if one understands what Christ is and how he relates to the form of the human body, the human imagination is guided in such a way that the image on Golgotha itself arises. This is how many of the older Christian painters were guided. They were not always clairvoyants, but were driven by the power of their knowledge of the mystery of Golgotha to the image of Golgotha, so that they were able to paint it. It was precisely at that great turning point in human evolution that the understanding of the Christ Being, that is, of the original I of the human being, was brought to the human ego-soul through clairvoyance.
Clairvoyance makes it possible to see the mystery of Golgotha outside the body. How? When a relationship to the mystery of Golgotha has been established within the body, it is possible even today to see the mystery of Golgotha in the higher worlds and thus to see the full significance of this great turning point in human evolution. But it is also possible to understand this mystery of Golgotha, and in the words I have just spoken, the possibility of understanding should be given. Of course, one must meditate long and hard on what has been said. And if someone feels that what has been said is difficult to understand, that is perfectly justified; for it goes without saying that what can lead the human soul to a full understanding of the greatest, the highest, and the most significant thing that has ever happened on earth is one of the most difficult things there is. In a certain way, the disciples should be led to this; and of these, who should gradually be brought to a new understanding of human evolution, Peter, James, and John proved to be the most useful.
It is good to keep in mind the significant period that occurred during the time of the Mystery of Golgotha from various perspectives. That is why it is so gratifying that you were able to hear Hegel's account of this moment this morning. For everything that human understanding can grasp can flow together to grasp the most significant thing that, having matured in the preceding centuries, came to pass around the time of the Mystery of Golgotha and then slowly prepared and conditioned the further evolution of humanity. It came to pass in various places on earth. We can trace these things not only in Palestine, where the event of Golgotha itself took place, but we can also trace them, if we proceed in the right way, at other points on the earth; only the event of Golgotha did not take place there. But we can trace the descent and ascent of humanity, the raising of humanity through the effect of the mystery of Golgotha, which spread throughout the Western world. We can trace the descent in particular, and it is interesting to see how we can trace the descent of humanity.
Let us take Greece again and consider how events unfolded half a millennium before the events of Golgotha took place. Over in the East, where Krishna appeared, people were in a sense ahead of their time. They were ahead, so to speak, in the era of the decline of ancient clairvoyance. There is something peculiar about this culture, for example in India. While in the immediate post-Atlantean period the first great post-Atlantean cultural flowering appeared in India and there was still a glimpse into the spiritual world in the purest way — in the purest way for the human soul — which was connected with the Rishis and a wonderful ability to represent what they saw so that it could have an effect on later periods, and then, when clairvoyance disappeared, it was preserved for later times in such significant revelations as the Krishna revelation. By the end of the third period, however, what was actually clairvoyance had already died out. But through Krishna and his disciples, the facts that could be seen were put into wonderful words and preserved, so that what had been seen earlier was available in the scriptures. What happened further west, for example in Greece, never actually happened in India.
If we take a close look at the Indian world, we can say: The old clairvoyance is dying out; in its place, those of whom Krishna is the most important write down in wonderful words what was once seen. This is then there in the word, in the Vedas. And those who immerse themselves in the word experience its echo in their souls. But what arises is not what arose in Socrates, for example, or in other philosophers. What can be called Western reason, Western judgment, does not appear in Indian souls. What we speak of today in the most eminent sense when we speak of the innate power of the ego does not even occur in India. Therefore, as soon as the old clairvoyance faded away, something else immediately came to the fore: the urge for yoga, the school-like ascent into the worlds that had been lost in a natural way. And yoga becomes an artificial clairvoyance. And basically, the philosophy of yoga immediately takes the place of the old clairvoyance, without there being anything in between that occurs, for example, in Greek, purely rational philosophy. This does not occur at all in Hinduism. This intermediate phase does not exist at all. And if we take the Vedanta philosophy of Vyasa, we can say: It is not as pronounced as Western worldviews teach, permeated by ideas, permeated by reason, but rather it is, as it were, brought down from the higher worlds, but put into human words; that is what is peculiar about it: it is not achieved with human concepts, not thought out like the Socratic, Platonic element, but seen clairvoyantly.
It is difficult to understand these things completely, but there is a way to experience this difference even today. Pick up any philosophy book, any presentation of a philosophical system of Western philosophy. What can seriously be called philosophy today, how has it mostly been achieved? If you look into the workshop of a person who can be called a serious philosopher, you can see how these systems have been gained through the effort of logical judgment and logical thinking. All this has been formed gradually. And those who do philosophy in this way cannot really understand that what they weave together from concept to concept can also be seen clairvoyantly in a certain sense, that one has it clairvoyantly before one's eyes. Hence the difficulty of making oneself understood when, one might say, with a single stroke, certain philosophical concepts that are otherwise woven from idea to idea “in the sweat of one's brow” are seen clairvoyantly and one does not need to go through all the individual steps of thought. The concepts of Vedanta philosophy are concepts seen clairvoyantly, as it were. They have not been acquired through the sweat of the brow, following the example of European philosophers, but have been brought down clairvoyantly; they are precisely the last remnants, diluted into abstract concepts, of the old clairvoyance, or the first, still tenuous conquests in the supersensible world achieved through yoga.
But people living more in the West have experienced something different. Here we see strange and important inner events in the evolution of humanity. Take, for example, a remarkable philosopher of the sixth century BC: Pherecydes of Syros. A remarkable philosopher! A philosopher whom today's philosophers do not consider a philosopher. There are philosophy books today that actually say this. I will quote two words verbatim: “Well, that is all childish description, childish symbols; ‘childish and ingenious,’ says someone today who considers himself particularly superior to that old philosopher.” So, half a millennium before the Christian era, a strange thinker appeared in Syros. However, he presented his ideas differently from the other thinkers who were later called philosophers. Pherekydes of Syros said, for example: “There are three things underlying what we see in the world: Chronos, Zeus, and Chthon. From Chronos come the airy, fiery, and watery elements. And with all that comes from these three powers, a kind of serpentine being comes into conflict, Ophioneus. Everything he describes can be seen before one's eyes if one follows his description with a little imagination, even without clairvoyance: Chronos, not only as abstract flowing time, but as a being, a real entity, visibly shaped; likewise Zeus, the infinite ether, as the self-animated omnipresence; Chthon, that through which the otherwise heavenly becomes earthly, that which draws together in the planet Earth what is woven apart in space, in order to have an earthly existence; all this taking place on earth; then, interfering like a hostile element, a kind of serpentine entity. If one pursues what the strange Pherckydes of Syros describes, one needs spiritual research to understand it, for he is one of the last remnants of ancient clairvoyance. He sees the world of causes behind the sensory world and describes these causes with his clairvoyant abilities. Naturally, this does not please those who operate solely in concepts. He sees the living weaving of the good gods and the interplay of the hostile forces, which he describes as seen through clairvoyance. He sees how the elements are born out of Chronos, out of real time.
So here we have in this philosopher Pherekydes of Syros a man who still looks into the world with his soul, which opens up clairvoyant consciousness, and describes it in a way that can be followed. This is how he still stands in the Western world in the sixth century BC. Thales, Anaximenes, Anaximander, Heraclitus, who are almost his contemporaries, already stand differently. Two worlds really collide here. But what does it look like in their souls? The old clairvoyance in them is extinguished, paralyzed. At most, there is still a longing for these spiritual worlds. And what do they experience at the point where a remnant of the old way of seeing still existed in the wise man of Syros, where he still looked into the elemental world of causes? That is already closed to them. They can no longer see into it. It is as if this world wanted to close itself off from them, as if it were still half there for them and yet withdrawing from them again, so that they replace the old clairvoyance with abstract concepts that belong to the ego. This is what it looks like in these souls. It is a very strange state of mind in Western souls. It is the state of mind that strives for reason, for the power of judgment that is supposed to distinguish the ego. We see it in individual souls, for example, when Heraclitus still describes the living, weaving fire, one might say with a last hint of true clairvoyant vision, as the cause of all things; Thales describes water, but not physical, sensory water, just as Heraclitus does not mean physical, sensual fire, but rather something from the elemental world that they still half see, while it half eludes them and they must give it abstract concepts. We look into these souls and understand how something of the mood of these souls could still resonate in our time.
If only our contemporaries would not so often read over certain things so thoughtlessly! Today, it is easy to read over a passage in Nietzsche that can deeply move, grip, and shake us. It is found in his posthumous work “Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks,” in which he describes Thales, Anaximander, Heraclitus, Parmenides, Anaxagoras, and Empedocles. There is a passage right at the beginning—you have to feel it—where Nietzsche sensed something of what had been experienced in the souls of these first lonely Greek thinkers. Read the passage in Nietzsche where he says: What must it have been like in the souls of these philosophical heroes who had to find their way out of the age of living intuition—of which he himself knew nothing more, but which he sensed—when the old vitality in their souls was replaced by abstract, dry, sober concepts, when “being,” this sober, dry, abstract, cold being, as a concept, took the place of the full vitality that clairvoyant consciousness had? And Nietzsche feels: It is as if one's blood freezes when one passes from the world of vitality into the world of concepts with Thales or Heraclitus, when these people use concepts of “being” and “becoming” in such a way that one feels transported from the warm realm of becoming into the icy region of concepts.
One must feel transported back to that age in which these people lived, one must feel how they stood there as the mystery of Golgotha approached, one must empathize with them to such an extent that one feels how there is still a dark echo of ancient times within them, but they stand there having to content themselves with what abstract judgment is in the human ego, which did not need to be there at all in earlier times. And while in the period that followed the world of concepts became richer and richer, in the early days, when the world of concepts was just emerging, the Greek philosophers could grasp only the simplest concepts. How they tormented themselves with concepts, with the abstract “being”; how, for example, the philosophers of the Eleatic school tormented themselves with the abstract “being”! This is how the actual abstract characteristics of the ego are prepared.
Now let us imagine such a soul, which stands in the West, prepared for this mission of the West, but which still carries within itself the strongest echoes of the ancient clairvoyance. In India, these echoes have long since faded away; in the West, they are still there. The soul's impulse wants to enter the elemental world, but consciousness cannot. A mood like the Buddha mood could not arise in these souls. The Buddha mood would have said: We have been cast out into the world of suffering; therefore, let us free ourselves from it. No, the Western souls wanted to grasp something of what was before them. They could not enter into what was behind them; in the world before them they had only cold, icy concepts. Let us imagine a soul such as Pherekydes of Syros. He is the one who was the last to be able to look into what is inside the elemental world. But let us imagine one of the other souls. It cannot see how the elements are born alive out of Chronos. It cannot see that the serpent creature Ophioneus begins the battle with the higher gods; but in the image it holds fast to the idea that something is working into the sensory world. It does not see through to Chronos; but it sees what emerges from Chronos as an imprint in the sensory world: fire, water, air, and earth. She does not see how the higher gods are fought by the lower ones, how the serpent god Lucifer rebels; but she sees how disharmony and harmony, friendship and enmity prevail. She sees love and hate as abstract concepts, fire, water, air, and earth as abstract elements. She sees what now penetrates the soul, but what was previously seen by her contemporaries is covered up.
Let us imagine such a soul that is still completely immersed in the life of earlier times but cannot see into the spiritual world, which can only grasp the outer image, in which what previously made people happy is covered up because of its special mission; on the other hand, however, it has nothing of the new world of the ego except a few concepts to which it must cling, then we have the soul of Empedocles. For this is how the soul of Empedocles stands before us when we want to grasp its innermost being. Empedocles is almost a contemporary of the wise man of Syros. He lives barely two-thirds of a century later. But his soul is of a completely different nature. It had to make the transition across the Rubicon from ancient clairvoyance to the abstract understanding of the self. Here we see two worlds colliding. Here we see the self dawning and moving toward its fulfillment. We see the souls of the ancient Greek philosophers, who were condemned to first accept what we now call reason and logic; we see how their souls were emptied by the old revelations. And into these souls had to be poured the new impulse, the impulse from Golgotha.
Such were the souls when this impulse arose. But they had to thirst for a new fulfillment. Only then could they understand it. For Indian thinking, there is almost no transition comparable to what we have with the lonely Greek thinkers. Therefore, Indian philosophy, which made the transition to the teaching of yoga, offers hardly any possibility of finding the transition to the mystery of Golgotha. Greek philosophy is so prepared that it thirsts for the mystery of Golgotha. Look at Gnosticism, how it demands the mystery of Golgotha in its philosophy. On Greek soil, the philosophy of the mystery of Golgotha arises because the best of the Greek souls yearned for the reception of the impulse of Golgotha.
One must have good will in order to understand what happened in human evolution; then, one might say, one senses something of what one might call: it is like a call and a response on the ground of the earth. We look to Greece, we look further to Sicily, to such souls as Empedocles, who is a particularly outstanding example, and we hear a strange call. How can we characterize it? How do such souls speak? Something like this—let us look into the soul of Empedocles: I know historically about initiation. I know historically that through initiation the supersensible worlds entered into the human soul. But now a different age has come. Initiation can no longer become immediately alive. The human soul has entered a different stage. We need a new impulse reaching into the I. Where are you, impulse, who can take the place of the old initiation, which we can no longer experience, who places before the new I the same mystery that was contained in the old clairvoyance? And to this the other call, coming from Golgotha, answers: I was allowed to bring forth, by submitting myself to the gods and not to men, the secrets of the mysteries, and to place them before all humanity, so that what otherwise stood in the depths of the mysteries may stand before all humanity.
What has been born in the souls of the Greeks in southern Europe, for example, appears to us like the question of the Western world for a new solution to the riddle of the world. And the great monologue of God, of which we spoke at the end of yesterday's lecture and of which we will speak further tomorrow, appears to us like the answer—which, however, can only be understood in the West.