The Circular Flow of Man's Life within the World Of Sense, Soul And Spirit

GA 68b — 13 November 1905, Zurich

17. Haeckel, the Riddles of the World and Theosophy

Report in the “Züricher Post”, November 24, 1905

Theosophy and the “world riddles”. We request the following lines to be included:

Th. S. On the evening of November 13, in front of a large audience of around 250 people, Dr. phil. Rud. Steiner from Berlin spoke about Theosophy and “The World Riddles” by E. Haeckel in the courtroom of the Schwurgericht (court of assizes). The speaker explained that the worldview called “Theosophy” (the wisdom of God) originated about thirty years ago. It is a spiritual movement that encompasses and unites religion, science, philosophy and ethics and answers questions about the origin, nature, purpose and goal of human beings. The world riddles are solvable; but only Theosophy is able to solve them, and in a way that satisfies all people, learned and unlearned. It is Theosophy that creates peace between the different worldviews, sciences and religions, all of which have a kernel of truth. But above all, Theosophy does not contradict the achievements of the natural sciences.

The lecturer now turns specifically to Haeckel's work “Die Welträtsel” (The Riddle of the World), whose widespread popularity is a testament to humanity's great interest in the most important questions. Many Theosophists speak out very sharply against Haeckel. I, the speaker continues, do not want that. Rather, I want to contribute to an understanding of Haeckel's world view. Haeckel's importance lies in the continuation of Darwinism, in the expansion of the evidence that all living things are based on a unified organization and that humans are also a link in the one great series of the animal world. But all this was recognized long before Darwin, for example by Goethe. However, his thoughts were in too lofty regions to be accessible and comprehensible to all people. Darwin's and his epigones' most significant work consists mainly in the fact that they drew the ideas of the unified context of all organisms (including humans) down to a level accessible to all of humanity, proved them to be true, and thus made them understandable to the mind. In this respect, Haeckel's “Welträtsel” (World Mysteries) is an astonishingly great achievement.

But great men also have great faults. From a theosophical point of view, there is nothing to be said against Darwin's theory of the origin of species. However, a distinction must be made

between Darwin's Darwinism and Haeckel's Darwinism, because in his writings, Darwin speaks of the “Creator” and the “Omniscient and Almighty, who foresees everything”. However, the original Darwinism occurred during a materialistic era and therefore received a thoroughly materialistic interpretation and explanation from its followers and developers. And it is only against this interpretation and explanation that Theosophy is directed.

The material and visible world is based on a transcendental and invisible one. If Darwinism had come into a spiritualistic-idealistic age instead of a materialistic one, it would undoubtedly have been interpreted and explained in a spiritualistic-idealistic way. But in an age when even the smallest living creature, the cell, can be seen by the armed bodily eye, the materialistic world view – and especially materialistic biology – is understandable. The “habits of thought”, whether religious, idealistic, materialistic and so on, play a major role. But thinking purely materialistically is a mistake; for there are perceptions (for example, the perception of the color red, the scent of roses, the sound of an organ) that cannot be conceived and explained in a materialistic way. They are based on material impulses, but these are not the deepest, ultimate cause. Materialism cannot solve the riddles of the world; this was also recognized, for example, by Du Bois-Reymond in his famous Ignorabimus speech. Haeckel's mistake, then, is that he brought his materialistic thinking habits into Darwinism, and that he also wants to explain mental and spiritual processes in material terms. But Theosophy does not want to criticize Haeckel's explanations of the physical or sensual, but to recognize them.

Steiner now turns specifically to Theosophy, which recognizes two entities in man, one soul or spiritual and one physical or material, and claims, for example, that these two entities are separate in the sleeping person. The fact that the soul or spirit does not express itself and does not feel in deep sleep is only because it lacks the organs to do so. Therefore, it is the task of every human being to recognize this and to decide to provide his soul with certain means corresponding to the sensory organs of the supersensible. The moment this happens is what the theosophist calls “rebirth”. Through the continued use of these means (which, however, were not mentioned), the soul or spirit develops into an organized supersensible, true or divine human being, to whom the dream world is also an entity and who can see the spirits with the “inner eye” just as the sensual human being can see the bodies with his outer eye. The body is transitory, the spirit or soul is eternal, an ineradicable unity. Therefore, theosophy is monism in the highest sense.

Will the newly formed “Theosophical Society Zurich” prosper and turn us all into Theosophists? The author of these lines does not think so. He believes it is a mistake to consider that what we call mind or spirit is not physical or natural, and finds it curious that we need to obtain organs for it. The theosophical identification of the terms soul and spirit is also unlikely to fall on fertile ground. Although today's state of science allows for certain differences, it no longer allows for sharp boundaries between what we call spiritual, mental and physical. Of course, theosophy has its merits in that it opposes crude materialism and seeks to give the spiritual side of man its due. But the theosophical degradation of the physical side of man, which, after all, also – to quote Darwin – originates from the “almighty and omniscient Creator” as his material and spiritual product, cannot stand up before the judgment seat of true science, such as natural science.