# Youth in an Age of Light

## GA 217a — 9 June 1924, Wrocław

You can be sure of this: anyone who is free from prejudice takes the youth movement of today very seriously indeed. If you look around, not among your contemporaries, but among the older people of today, it may seem to you that the youth movement is not taken seriously, but it is quite certainly taken seriously by those who attempt real spiritual development.

Several years have passed since a small group of young people entered the Anthroposophical Society: they did not want simply to participate as hearers of what the Society gives, but brought to it those thoughts and feelings which young people today regard as characteristic of their age. This small group, which met in Stuttgart a few years ago, put before the anthroposophical movement the question: “How can you give us a place in this movement?” I believe that from my side this question was really understood at that time. It is not always easy to understand the question which a genuinely seeking human being puts to his time; and young people now have a number of questions, entirely justified, which *cannot* be expressed quite clearly.

At the time when the youth movement and the anthroposophical movement first came into contact, it really seemed to me as if they were being led together by a kind of destiny, a kind of Karma. I must still look on it in this way; the youth movement and the anthroposophical movement have by an inner destiny to take each other into account. When I call up all that I have experienced through many decades in the endeavour to bring about a community among human beings who wish to seek for the spirit, and relate this to what has developed as a youth movement since about the turn of the century, I have to say that what was felt by a very small number forty years ago, and was then hardly noticed, because so few were concerned, is felt today within a youth movement which is becoming more and more widespread. In your words of greeting it was well expressed—how difficult it really is becoming for a young human being to live.

Although at other times there has always been a kind of youth movement, it was different from what it is today. If one talks to older people about the youth movement, they often say, “Oh well, young people always felt different from the elderly, always wanted something different. That wears off, balances itself out. The youth movement of today need not be regarded differently from the opposition brought by the younger generation against older generations at all times in the past.”

From many sides I have heard this answer to the burning question of the youth movement of today. Nevertheless this answer is entirely wrong; and herein lies an immense difficulty. Always in the past there was something among younger people, however radical they appeared, which could be called a certain recognition for the institutions and methods of life founded by older people. The young could regard it as an ideal to grow into the things passed down from older times, step by step. It is no longer so today. It is not just a question of involvement in academic life, but of the fact that the young human being, if he intends to go on living, has to grow into the institutions brought about by the older people, and here the young feel themselves strangers; they are met by what they have to regard as a kind of death. They see the whole way in which older people behave within these institutions as something masked. The young feel their own inner human character as alive, and around they see nothing but masked faces. This is something that can bring the young to despair—that they do not find human beings among older people, but for the most part only masks. It is really so that men come to meet one like imprints, forms stamped in wax, representing classes, callings, or even ideals—but they do not meet one as full, living human beings.

Though it may sound rather abstract, it is a very real fact in human feeling that we are standing at a turning-point of time, as mankind has not stood through all history or indeed through most of pre-history. I do not like speaking about times of transition; there is always a transition from what went before to what is coming; all that matters is the specific change that is going on. But it is a fact that mankind stands today at a turning-point as never before, in historic or in prehistoric times. Significant things are going on in the depths of the human soul, not so much in consciousness as in the depths—and these are really processes of the spiritual world, not limited to the physical world.

We hear it said that at the turning-point from the nineteenth to the twentieth century, the so-called Dark Age came to an end, and a new Age of Light has begun. Anyone who can look into the spiritual world knows quite certainly that this is so. The fact that not much light has yet appeared does not disprove it; men are accustomed to the old darkness, and—just as a ball which has been thrown goes on rolling—this too rolls on, through inertia. Our civilisation today goes rolling on through inertia, and when we look at the effects of this in the world around us, we feel it all has something in common. To describe these dead things in a living way is not easy, but for everything nowadays—one might say—documentary proof is required. Nothing is held to be justified in the eyes of our modern civilisation unless documentary evidence for it can be produced. For every scientific fact, for every assertion, and even for every human being, there must be documentary evidence. Before he can enter any profession or calling, he must have a certificate. In scientific life everything has to be proved. Anything not proved does not count, cannot even be understood.

I could say a lot about this certification, this having to be proved. It appears sometimes in grotesque forms. I will tell you of a little event connected with this. When I was young, though not very young, I edited a periodical, and was involved in a lawsuit over a small matter. There was not much in it: I went myself, and won my case in the first court. The plaintiff was not satisfied, so he appealed. I went again, and the opposing counsel said to me: “We do not need you at all, only your solicitor, where is he?” I said I had not brought one, I thought it was my own affair. That was no good. I had to use my ingenuity to get the case adjourned; and I was told that next time my presence would be useless; I had to send a solicitor. For in an appeal case it was not the custom for someone to represent himself.

I went away very much amused. And I forgot the whole thing until the day before the case was to continue. I went into the town and thought: I cannot let myself be told again tomorrow that I am unnecessary. As I went along the street I saw a solicitor's brass plate and went in. I did not know him, or anything about him. He said: “Who recommended me to you?” I said: “Nobody.” I had thought somebody else would not do it any better, and took the first I saw. He said: “Write out on a piece of paper what I should say tomorrow.” I wrote it for him and stayed away, according to custom. A few days later he wrote that I had won the case.

I could tell you a hundred things like this out of my own life. It is everywhere regarded as irrelevant to have an actual human being present; the important thing is that accepted procedures should be followed. Young people feel this. They do not want documentary proof for everything, but something different. Instead of proofs, they would put experience. Older people do not understand this word, “experience.” It is not in their dictionaries and can appear quite horrible to them; to speak of spiritual experience is horrible for many people. This is what we find at the transition from a dark age to an age of light; it signifies a radical turning-point.

It is quite natural that this transition should present itself in two streams, so to speak. The anthroposophical movement and the youth movement have by destiny a certain connection. The anthroposophical movement unites people of every class, occupation and age, who felt at the turning-point from the 19th to the 20th century that man has to place himself into the whole cosmos in a quite different way. For him it is no longer simply a question of something being confirmed by evidence or proved—he must be able to experience it. Hence it appeared to me quite in accordance with Karma that the two movements were led together. And so a kind of youth movement developed within the anthroposophical movement. And finally, when the anthroposophical movement was refounded at Christmas at the Goetheanum, this soon led to the institution of a youth section, which was to take care of the concerns that arise in the feelings of young people in a most sincere and genuine way.

An immensely encouraging beginning was made by our anthroposophical youth movement in the first months of this year. There are reasons for a certain stagnation at present; they lie in the difficulties of the youth movement. These difficulties arise because it is so hard to give something form out of the existing chaos, in particular the present spiritual chaos. To give something form is much more difficult than ever before. The strangest things happen to one today. Those who know me will know that I am not at all inclined to boast. But when I heard Rector Bartsch speak yesterday in such a warm and friendly way, saying that when I come to the anthroposophical society here I am welcomed like a father, I had to say, yes, there is something in it. So I am addressed as a father—and fathers are old; they can no longer be quite young. In Dornach, when we began the youth section, I suggested that the young people should speak out clearly and frankly. A number of young people spoke well and honestly. Then I spoke. Afterwards, when it was all over, somebody who knows me well said, after he had listened to everything: “All the same, you are the youngest among the young people.” This can happen today; in one place one is addressed as an old father, in another as the youngest among the young. Ideas no longer have to be quite fixed. But if you climb up and down the steps of the ladder, sometimes as the little old father, sometimes as the youngest of all, you have a good opportunity to catch a glimpse of what is living in people's feelings.

I said that the youth section was stagnating. This will pass. It has happened, because it is, to begin with, extremely difficult for a young mind to *think* its way into something which it *feels* quite clearly. Our civilisation, in losing the spirit, has lost the human being! If I now speak more from the background of existence, I see that young people who have come down recently from the spiritual world into physical existence have come with demands on life quite different from the demands brought by those who came down earlier. Why is this so? You do not need to believe me. But for me this is knowledge, not merely belief. Before one comes down to physical earthly existence one passes through much in the spiritual world which is fuller of meaning and mightier as an experience than anything passed through on earth. Earthly life should not be undervalued. Without earthly life, freedom could never be developed. But the life between death and rebirth is on a grander scale. The souls who came down are the souls which are in you, my dear friends. These souls were able to behold an immensely significant spiritual movement taking its course behind physical existence in regions above the earth—the movement which I call within our anthroposophical society the Michael movement.

This is so. Whether the materialistic man of today' is prepared to believe it or not, it is so! The leading power for our present time, who could be named in a different way, but whom I call the Michael power, is trying to achieve, within the spiritual leadership of the earth and of mankind, a transformation of all soul-life upon the earth. Men who became so very clever during the 19th century have no inkling of the fact that the attitude of soul which developed during the 19th century as the most enlightened attitude has been given up by the spiritual world. An end to it has been ordained, and a Michael community of beings, who never walk upon earth, but lead humanity, seeks to bring about among men a new attitude of soul. The death of the old civilisation has come.

When the Threefold Commonwealth movement, which failed through the death of the old civilisation, was going on, I often said: “We have today no threefold membering in public life according to the spirit, according to law and so on, and according to economic life—but we have a threefold membering in terms of phrases, conventions and routines. Instead of spiritual life, there are phrases; and routine dominates economic life, instead of goodwill towards men, love for men, which should be ruling there.”

This condition of soul, in which people are stuck fast, should be replaced by another, which arises from man himself and is experienced in man himself. That is the endeavour of spiritual beings who have taken over the leadership of our age and can be recognised in the signs of the times. The souls which have descended to the earth in your bodies saw this Michael movement and came down under this impression. And here they grew up in the midst of a humanity which really excludes man, which makes man into a mask. The youth movement is thus a wonderful memory of experience before birth, of most significant impressions gathered during this pre-earthly life. And if someone has these indefinite unconscious memories of pre-earthly life, of the endeavour to achieve a transformation of man's mood of soul—he will find nothing of it here on earth. That is what is going on today in the feelings of young people.

The anthroposophical movement springs from the revelation of the Michael movement; and has the purpose of bringing the intentions of the Michael movement into the midst of human life. The anthroposophical movement seeks to look up from the earth to the Michael movement. Young people bring with them a memory of pre-earthly existence. So the youth movement and the anthroposophical movement are brought together by destiny. And everything that has happened through the interplay between these two movements appeared to me to come about in a quite inward way, not through earthly circumstances, but through spiritual circumstances, inasmuch as these are connected with man. Thus I regard this youth movement as something which can awaken unlimited hopes for the future of all that can be felt rightly as anthroposophical.

Of course we encounter things which are bound to arise from the fact that the anthroposophical movement and the youth movement are both at their beginnings. We have seen the Free Anthroposophical Society founded side by side with the Anthroposophical Society in Germany. This Free Anthroposophical Society had—again inevitably—a governing committee that was chosen or elected. I think this committee had seven members—somebody says there were nine—very well, nine; there were nine, but one after the other was politely discharged from office, until three were left. All very comprehensible. The Free Anthroposophical Society had the essential intention of understanding the experience of youth. Now a discussion on this subject developed. One after another the committee members had their capacity to experience youth in the right way disputed. Three remained, and of course they discussed with one another whether all of them had the experience of youth. Something quite remarkable arose, pointing to a link of destiny between the youth movement and the anthroposophical movement. It seems ridiculous, but is very serious. For when one investigates the great questions of destiny, one finds very significant things, and the greatness of destiny is often indicated in symptoms. When we had founded the Anthroposophical Society, we also had committee members who quarrelled terribly, and it was evident to me that eventually very few would remain, after they had politely dismissed the others. But to prevent it from ending there, the left side of a person would start quarrelling with the right side over which side really had the experience of youth. That sounds like irony, but is not. For it indicates that what can be called the experience of youth today lies deep within the soul, and the significant thing is that this experience cannot necessarily be expressed in clear words. In the age of cleverness so many clear words have been spoken! What matters is that we should reach experiences. And then this inability to find clear forms of expression should be recognised as unavoidable. The right to continue in a state of vagueness is in fact claimed. But something else is needed: a refusal to separate from one another because an impression of unclarity is given, and a willingness to come together and talk.

Above all I would like to express to you, my young friends who are sitting here today, the wish that all of you, whatever you may feel and think, may hold together with an iron will, truly hold together. This is what we need most of all, if we want to achieve something in approaching the great questions of today. We cannot always be asking whether someone else has a rather different opinion from one's own. It is really a question of finding one another, even in the greatest differences of feeling. This will perhaps be the finest achievement, that those who are young understand how to keep together in spite of differences in feeling. It is a fact that what young people miss most of all today is the finding of other human beings. Wherever they go, they find, not human beings, for the human beings have died, but masks, everywhere masks! This has had a natural consequence: a search by human beings for one another. And that is very moving; for all the various “scout” movements, the *Wandervogel* movements and so on, are all a search for the human being. Young people want to join with others; they are looking in others for the human being. This is quite comprehensible. Because the human being was no longer there spiritually, each one said to himself: “But I feel, all the same, that the human being must be there.” And they looked for the human being, looked for him in community. But we should not forget that this has something immensely tragic about it.

Many young people have experienced this tragedy. They joined together and believed they were finding the human being. But nothing of what they were seeking came to fill their community; and they became even lonelier than before. These two phases of the youth movement are evident: the phase of community, the phase of great loneliness. How many young people there are today who go in loneliness through the world, conscious that nowhere have they been understood.

Now the truth is that one cannot find the human being in another person unless one knows how to look for him in a spiritual way—for man is in fact a spiritual being, and if one approached a man only externally, he cannot be found, even if he is there. It is indeed lamentable today, how people pass each other by. Certainly, earlier times can be rightly criticised. Much was barbaric then. But there was something: a man could find the human being in another man. He cannot do this now. Grown men all pass each other by. No one knows the other. He cannot even live with the other, because no one listens to the other. Everyone shouts in the other's ear his own opinion, and says: “That is my opinion, that is my point of view ”. You have merely points of view, nothing more. For what is asserted from one point of view or another makes no difference. These things murmur among young people, perceived by the heart, not by the mind.

You can be sure it must be right to feel a connection of destiny between the youth movement and the anthroposophical movement. Young people did not come to Anthroposophy just because they wanted to try out this as well, after they had tried out many other things—they came to it from destiny. And this gives me the certainty that we shall be able to work together. We shall find our way to one another, and, however things turn out, they must above all develop in such a way that those human qualities in the widest sense which live among young people are taken into account. Otherwise, if real spirit does not spring forth from youth, something utterly different will come about. For youthful life is certainly there, and one will be able to feel it; but this condition of youth, if it is not filled with spirit, ceases early in the twenties. We cannot preserve youth physiologically. We have to grow old, but we must be able to carry something from youth into old age. We must understand the condition of youth in such a way that we can rightly grow old with it. Unless spirit touches the soul, the deepest soul, the years between twenty and thirty cannot be lived through without coming into grey misery of soul. And this is my greatest anxiety. How can we work together in such a way that our young people will be able to cross the abyss between the twenties and the thirties without losing their vital spirit, without falling into grey misery of soul? I have known human beings who in their mid-twenties fell into this grey misery of soul. For, to speak fundamentally, that which lives in the depths of young souls after the end of the Kali Yuga is a cry for the spirit.

*The following questions and answers were missing from this translation:*

With these words, I wanted to give you a little introduction. I hope you will have a lot to say. Speak openly, choose a chairman, or do as you wish. I have also asked the Dornach youth to speak openly so that we can work together. The Dornach Executive Council will certainly listen attentively, and we will take everything you have to say as good lessons for the Youth Section at the Goetheanum. We do not want to act paternalistically, but rather in a spirit of brotherhood toward what you have to say.

Question: One of the young friends said that they would like to work on something together. However, this joint work had become difficult for them; the Christmas plays had been the most successful. They always got tired after a short time and felt worn out by their work. Then they talked about the Michael idea.

Rudolf Steiner: How can one enter into a profession and be a true human being in that profession with inner joy? Yes, you see, these things are not so easy to answer, my dear friends, but perhaps one can contribute something to the answer if one knows these things from experience. You see, I had many friends when I was your age. They also asked how one could enter a profession without losing one's joy, without killing one's soul, so to speak. After they had all spent a long time freelancing — back then, they called it “Brauseköpfe” when someone wanted to develop freely — they pushed themselves into some profession, but they withered away spiritually. I don't like to talk about myself, but in this case I must. I did not settle into any profession, because if I had done so, there would have been no anthroposophical movement. In order to shape Goethe's legacy, one could not remain stuck in any profession. One must shape one's life. That is why I can say a few things from my own life in answer to the question. The problem cannot be solved by entering into today's professions and retaining inner joy in life. But that is why one must enter into today's professions, because it is resignation not to enter into any profession. To do this, you must bring yourself to realize that it is not possible to enter into today's professions with joy in life or satisfaction. This will only be possible when professional life is structured in such a way that it is appropriate for human beings. We must give up the idea of entering a modern profession and being full of joie de vivre. You must solve the problem outside of your profession. In the little time that your profession leaves you, however, you must make all the more intensive efforts. It is extremely pleasant, and I agree with what you said from the other point of view, about performing Christmas plays and enjoying them; but I have met people who also came to the Christmas plays, who were there and took part, and who had gray hair not only on their heads but also in their souls. You don't need to be young for that.

Anthroposophy has a peculiarity. If you are an ambitious person today and want to educate yourself a little, you take in what is written in books. What demands does literature make? It demands that it be unambiguous. When you pick up a scientific book, it doesn't matter whether you are eighteen, twenty-five, thirty-seven, or eighty years old. The truth should have an effect on you everywhere. It should be absolutely true. This is not the case with anthroposophy. You will perceive anthroposophy differently as an eighteen-year-old than as a twenty-six-year-old, because it grows with you. It nestles up to people in their youth and also in their old age. Just as people themselves grow old, so does anthroposophy. When you immerse yourself in this completely new, call it worldview, soul state, whatever you want, when you indulge in something completely new, form communities in order to let precisely that live in the community, you will come to realize: Here you can be young and find your place in the right way, so that things also have a youthful effect. Old people accuse us of not understanding anthroposophy. That is a good sign for anthroposophy! You are not supposed to understand it, you are supposed to experience it. And this last bit of conservatism must also disappear, the belief that one can find joy in today's professions. One must find a path alongside one's profession and find enough people for this path that a force arises that can reshape professions. For only in reshaped professions can one find joy.

Much can be done to bring about this power, as I have characterized it in the Michael power. But it must be lived out in grandiose Michael celebrations. We really must bring it to the point where the budding life of the future, which we can still feel in its embryonic form, can emerge in celebrations of hope, in celebrations of expectation. In celebrations where people are held together only by hope and expectation, not by sharply defined ideals, we should have before us the image of Michael with his leader's eyes, his pointing hand, and his spiritual armor. Such a celebration must come into being. Why has it not come about? As firmly as I will point out that this festival must emerge from the bosom of the anthroposophical movement, I will also hold back as long as the strength to hold it worthy is not there. For the time is too serious to make it playful. When it is celebrated in a dignified manner, it will send great impulses into humanity. Therefore, we must wait until the strength is there. There should not be just a vague, blue, hazy edification of the Michael idea, but the awareness that a new soul world must be established among human beings. It is indeed the Michael principle that is leading. This includes communal experiences in order to work toward a Michaelmas festival where “the spirit of hope for the future, the spirit of expectation, can live. This is something that can already be at work and, after work, can give great satisfaction, so that one can go to work with resignation. This should not dishearten you, but inspire you.”

Question: You are forced to be a different person during your work. In the evening, you do exercises, climb the ladder, and during the day you are pulled back down again.

Rudolf Steiner: You cannot bring this into your profession either, because there are far too few people today for a real force to emerge. This would happen if all those who feel, however dimly, that something else is to be expected, would strive for unity. If you are in any profession today, you know very well that there are a whole number of others who do not feel the same way you do. These people do not feel the need to spend their evenings in youth movement meetings; they are so entrenched in their profession that they are actually satisfied with it because they do not have what it takes to be dissatisfied; they do not want their profession to give them pleasure. Something characteristic emerged in the second half of the 19th century. I was driven to despair at scientific meetings. As long as there were a few hours of official proceedings, scientific discussions took place. Then everyone would sit down together, and anyone who dared to say a word about their profession was regarded as a philistine. Those among them who did not want to be philistines were even more so. They always had the words “Don't talk shop!” on their lips. This shows that they were not at all interested in what they did for a living. This is true in all fields. People are largely victims of their times; they could be won over to something better. This includes allowing more power to emerge in the intellectual movements of the time, so that those who find their profession oppressive are not left standing there, crushed by others who have no such needs. So the more we refrain from trying to achieve something tomorrow, the more we strive to work diligently in what should initially be a spiritual community working toward something, the better it will be. That is what we must keep in mind.

Question: Contrast between young and old. The old anthroposophists only want to drag the spirit into themselves. The young want to bring it out. The others want to slow things down; they express themselves mockingly about what the young are creating.

Rudolf Steiner: The contrast between young and older people did not need to be so pronounced. It seems to me that what I said is right, that one should try, because it is already impossible to treat everyone the same, to be tolerant of others. It is quite certain that, on the one hand, those who have the necessary temperament will strive to look outwards into the world with what they have. It would be sad if this were not the case. But on the other hand, there is also a considerable difference in strength. There will be stronger elements that will be able to accomplish some things earlier than others dare to. But something decisive will only be achieved when the different shades come together. It is possible to come together. The anthroposophical movement could do a lot in this regard; unfortunately, it does not.

I believe that when the youth movement finds its way into anthroposophy, the various nuances will come to the fore. As far as I am concerned, nothing will ever be said against the youth movement that proceeds from the temperament you have described. I would be the last person to object to that. But in my youth I saw how strongly one encounters resistance and how one fights with bloody brows. It is good for those who want to do it, but you know, it is not everyone's cup of tea, so to speak, to expose oneself to an uncertain fate from the outset. But if you are in a position to work in this direction again, then you should do so not by criticizing others who do not do the same, but by pointing out what has really been achieved. It is certainly important to point out the positive things that have already been achieved in this direction. I believe that this is far too little known among young people; it remains confined to small circles. And that is the danger, even if it does not appear in such a blatant form among young people as it does in sects, precisely because it emerges among young people. There must be no sectarianism. What must prevail is what is universally human.

Question about the different age groups gathered, between eighteen and twenty-five, and the different levels of education of those concerned.

Rudolf Steiner: The reason for this is basically that egoism plays such an enormously strong role in our civilization. It is impossible for people to empathize with others. Everyone speaks and acts only from their own perspective. Just think how different it is when you can empathize with others. Let's say there is a man in his sixties talking to a five-year-old boy. I actually think that the five-year-old child empathizes much more with the sixty-year-old than the sixty-year-old does with the child. Crawling into the other person is what you have to learn. You can do that through anthroposophy because it's flexible. When we're held together by spiritual interests, the age difference between fifteen and twenty-five easily disappears, especially when you've been together for a while. But when you're only held together by selfish interests, fifteen-year-olds and twenty-five-year-olds don't understand each other. It is a matter of overcoming egoism. One must find one's way into something objective. Egoism is the signature of the age. When we begin to take a genuine interest in human beings, this cannot last. Egoism is thoroughly overcome when one first overcomes it in something that enters the soul as deeply as anthroposophy. You have to relate to your inner self. Then you shed your egoism and can find your way into others. That is the fruit that appears.

The reason you cannot understand each other is because you do not have the human being. If someone is not a human being, but a template of what a twenty-five-year-old is supposed to be today, how can they understand other human beings? If you are an academic, at twenty-five you are not a human being, but a clothes rack on which hang your high school diploma and your fear of the final exam. At fifteen, you are a clothes rack with your school report cards hanging on it, waiting to be signed by your parents. The various objects do not understand each other, but as soon as we come to human beings, we understand each other. It is the same with professions, with different professions. We are no longer righteous human beings; we are in fact a copy of the various circumstances. And therein lies the significance of the youth movement, that it has shed this, that it wants people. That is what you encounter in these people. When they are out of work, they want to be people. They will become that when they are clearly imbued with such things.

Hermann Bahr describes what happened to him when he came to a big city. He was invited everywhere, on Sunday, on Monday, and now—yes, he couldn't tell the ladies sitting on the left side of the table from the ladies sitting on the right; he couldn't tell the ladies from Sunday from the ladies from Monday. It all got mixed up. Yes, you see, when you come into such societies, people look so much alike because they are all copies of these circumstances.

Question: Should one give up one's profession and devote oneself entirely to anthroposophy, or can one warm up to the profession?

Rudolf Steiner: That is an individual matter. One should never shy away from doing what one has recognized as the right thing. Sometimes one can do it, sometimes one cannot. If one can, one should have a feeling for it and do it. Of course, you can also become a martyr. But that should not become a general rule. Because then you will not get ahead, or at least it would have to become a general rule. But if only one percent out of a hundred are prepared to become martyrs, then you will not get anywhere, because the others will destroy it. That can only be answered individually. I have answered it individually in my life by never entering a profession. Of course, you can say that this means I don't know how to promote a profession. I was already standing alongside those who were there. But it has become the case that professional life has become somewhat rigid, that it is extremely difficult to achieve much in any profession given the complexity of life today. If you have a knack for it, you can do it.

Question: It has been said that 'individual groups were formed because it was not possible to unite young and old. Again, a question about the profession.

Rudolf Steiner: There is not much point in pursuing a profession if you want to be human. You have to resign yourself and develop an independent life alongside your profession. What the gentleman is saying here stems from a misunderstanding of anthroposophy.

One must be able to understand what is good about the youth movement. Rudolf Steiner: It is only that the youth movement in particular can experience through anthroposophy how one can work positively in harmony with the whole cosmos, excluding everything negative. For anthroposophy, by its very nature, since it is not accepted by anyone who cannot experience it, excludes any unfree activity. I never set out to agitate for anthroposophy. I said what I knew. I knew that if I spoke to a thousand people, only five would really take it on board at first. I never made a big deal of it, because it's the same with herring in the sea. Even if a thousand eggs are scattered, only two or three will become real herring. Those who look for success can never achieve it. One must work from within the matter itself. What I mean is that we should let everyone do what they can and not be too dismissive, not say too strongly: That is not what young people should be, that is not what the youth movement should be. As many people as possible should come together, each doing what they can from their own individuality.

The difference between fifteen and twenty-five will be overcome when everyone is young, and everyone is young. It's not so bad what differs. The basic form is already there. Others who stay outside go to the movies; they don't join youth associations.p>

Now, the problem is that perhaps too much thought is given to the idea that a form must be given. It is much more important to achieve a sincere relationship between people than to create a form. If you love each other, you go where you are loved and do not look for a form. Perhaps it is wrong to look for a form. The point is that you come together even when you are completely at odds with each other; that you enjoy being together, enjoy each other's company. And when this purely human, emotional element gives form, it is the healthiest form. Any programmatic search for form will even disrupt the youth movement. We have also thought of many things in relation to the youth section at the Goetheanum, and many things will emerge that will provide a basis for dealing with things once we have passed a certain point of stagnation.

If the striving for light that occurs after the Kali Yuga — it does not have to be an abstract spiritual light — is really so strong in human beings that they cannot help but follow it, then we do not need any further forms. It is only disruptive to have special forms. The living must come together in human beings. I think that even if there are only two or three people in a large gathering who are wholeheartedly enthusiastic about their cause, they will come together because those two or three are there, because they can be found there. It must be the human element. This will certainly be found if we do not come together with limp arms, limp legs, and limp brains, but with zeal and a sincere desire within ourselves. And if we do not expect others to entertain us, but go there and want to achieve something ourselves, if we want to achieve something and expect as little as possible from others, if we want to do as much as possible ourselves, then we have the form. It is so difficult to talk about general programmatic things. What matters is life in the things that exist in life. If you are in your profession and then have to do something extra, you become tired in your profession. But enthusiasm is necessary, and it is so easy for young people to have today because it is so terribly lacking in old age. Nothing moves, there is no enthusiasm; old age weighs heavily on the body. This can inspire enthusiasm in young people if you decide today to really discuss what you all think in the near future together with those who are here today. Then you will already have enough form, and we will send out all kinds of messages and questions from the Goetheanum. You will have something to do again, and so simply look for opportunities to meet and skip the meetings as little as possible. Then it will work out; that is the best form. It is perhaps even the first principle in relation to form-building: we have so many friends who want to consider it a first principle not to skip our meetings. Then a form is already there. Question about the Wandervogel youth movement.

Rudolf Steiner: In reality, there need not be any contradiction. With the Wandervogel, you go out into nature, you want to experience nature, you want to experience the human aspect of nature, and so on. If, after striving for all this and believing that you have gone through it for a while, you fall into another extreme, no longer wanting nature and reading books, then you did not have the first thing in the right way. Today, people can travel all over the world and see nothing. You can show you the most beautiful examples of travelers to Italy, of English wanderers who saw nothing at all. They looked at the galleries, but in reality they saw nothing. I have seen a number of wanderers who had the urge to see something, but who saw nothing.

To see something, you have to have a heart. But if you are prevented from being a whole human being in elementary school, you cannot see what is in nature. If you can once again respond to all that is in nature, then you will find something different from others in “How to Know Higher Worlds.” This book is by no means written to the exclusion of nature, but rather with nature in mind. It has been said that you can tell from my style that I write with a typewriter because I don't have time to write during the day. This criticism is certainly not correct. I have never put a typewriter in my bed, where I write most of my work. That would look ridiculous. It depends on how things are conceived. They are conceived entirely in contemplation of nature. “How does one attain knowledge of the higher worlds?” is definitely a Wandervogel book. I see no contradiction in the fact that one is neither one thing nor the other. If you experience nature as a Wandervogel, then you will also experience the book, which is not meant to be a book at all. It only looks like one. But certain things can only be brought into the world through printing ink. If the youth movement succeeds, we will also get beyond printing ink. We must come to the human, only, you see, the Anthroposophical Society cannot achieve everything at once; it is already doing a lot; unfortunately, it has not succeeded. It was my intention never to have certain things that are said from person to person printed. I am so glad that no one is taking notes today. There have always been people who have taken notes. What was a terrible transcript came out, and so I had to find a way to get things printed after all.