The Human Being as a Spirit and Soul Being

GA 71b — 16 February 1918, Munich

The Human Being as a Spiritual and Soul Being. Research from the Perspective of Spiritual Science

Dear attendees, the two lectures that I will take the liberty of giving today and on Monday will together form a whole in a certain respect, with one explaining the other; however, I will endeavor to make each of the lectures a complete whole so that it can be heard on its own. The spiritual scientific world view, which I have been presenting here in Munich for many years now, is subject to many misunderstandings, as is well known to many who have encountered this world view and yet, it may be said that, even if not in the consciousness of our contemporaries, this world view proves to be very strongly hoped for, one might say, in the general emotional life of our contemporaries.

But the source and the actual character of this world view are misunderstood by one side or the other. Therefore, whenever it is mentioned, it is always necessary to at least briefly point out, in the introduction, how the very way of thinking in our time and in the recent past, which is particularly justified in becoming established in the consciousness of of the contemporaries, how the scientific way of thinking forms the source of spiritual science, of which a large proportion of our educated contemporaries are justifiably of the opinion that it stands on the ground of well-disciplined scientific research. And precisely because the scientific character of the humanities represented here is denied from the most diverse sides, it must always be emphasized that these humanities not only do not contradict – that would not mean much – the natural scientific way of thinking of our time, but that it has its source in it, that it is confirmed and supported by this natural scientific way of thinking, if one understands the latter in the right sense, in all its statements.

Now, however, there are many reasons for misunderstandings, and if I may make a personal comment, it is that wherever the relationship between all kinds of amateur representations of this or that intellectual direction and between natural science is at issue, I myself will always stand on the ground of natural science and with natural science against amateurish intellectualism. But precisely the way in which natural science has developed in recent times, how it has found its way into the minds of contemporaries, makes it necessary to emphasize with all strength the possibility of a special investigation of spiritual life.

The nature of science in this direction can best be described by saying that anyone who is familiar with the development of science in recent centuries, and particularly in the immediate past, can only be an admirer of science and an acknowledgment of the fact that science has developed the best-disciplined concepts to get to know and control the broad field of natural phenomena with these concepts as well as possible. No branch of spiritual science should want to deny the great achievements of scientific research and thinking; but on the other hand, there is the following significant fact, namely that if one endeavors to do scientific research and think in the right way, thinking, when one develops such concepts and ideas that are particularly suited to grasp nature in its external, sensory phenomena, then these concepts and ideas will prove inadequate, indeed unsuitable, for penetrating into the spiritual realm.

Those who are familiar with the development of human spiritual life know that centuries ago it was different in this respect. One of the greatest rifts in human cultural life occurred when the scientific way of thinking arose three or four centuries ago. Because people are not familiar with the way people thought about nature before, they fail to recognize this tremendously significant change in human spiritual culture. But anyone who is familiar with the way thinking about nature was viewed throughout the ages more than three or four centuries ago knows that in earlier times, the concepts of nature always included the idea that spiritual forces are at work in natural processes and phenomena. At the same time, by observing natural phenomena, one has taken with one's knowledge of this or that natural phenomenon ideas about the spiritual that permeates nature.

The scientific view has rightly discarded everything that somehow refers to the spiritual in order to get nature pure in its insights. And so it is no wonder that in the course of the last three or four centuries, such ideas have emerged that are precisely suited to understanding nature and that prove unsuitable for somehow approaching the spirit. And in our time, after this process has existed for a long time and become established in the minds and souls of men, in our time, even if it does not yet fully understand this desire itself, the human soul demands an approach to the spiritual realm that is just as rigorous as the scientific path to the spiritual realm, but one that stands alongside the path of scientific world view, since the latter itself cannot find access to the spirit.

What I have just said can be seen not only when one looks at the general course of scientific development over the last few centuries, but also when one looks at the particular way of thinking of the most outstanding scientific researchers of the present day. I must emphasize that, precisely with regard to the exemplary nature of scientific thinking of thought of outstanding researchers of the present, for which I, as a humanities scholar, am full of appreciation. I would just like to emphasize by way of introduction that the natural scientific development in recent years has come to a level-headed, solid position regarding the much-debated question of Darwinism, and really significant work has been done in this area.

One of the many, many testimonies to this is the significant book by Oscar Hertwig, “The Becoming of Organisms”, a refutation of the Darwinian theory of chance. Here, for once, a scientist himself, with all the tools that science can provide, has shown how one-sided the last third of the nineteenth century was in relation to important questions. If you then set about recognizing the way such personalities think, you find the peculiarity that such personalities limit themselves in their field, rightly limiting themselves to researching what is given externally through the senses , and that they say – this can be found in particular in Oscar Hertwig: everything that goes beyond observation and the methodical knowledge of the senses must, Hertwig says, be left to metaphysics, epistemology and so on.

All this would be very nice. One could say: Such a researcher therefore refers to spiritual science himself; but it is not that simple. Wherever such things occur today, especially among the most important natural scientists, they are at the same time connected, I would say, with an unspoken but effective fight against any kind of research into spiritual life in our time, in that it is always pointed out – even if it is said that natural science itself has no access to the spiritual, it must leave that to another branch of science —-, when it is always emphasized that true science can only be achieved by sticking to sensory observation and the methods that take sensory observation a little further. Thus, at the same time, the necessity of a special spiritual science that goes beyond the sensory world is emphasized, but, I might say, unconsciously, this spiritual science is discredited at the same time by denying its scientific nature.

As a result, not only those who are scientists in our modern sense, not only those who inform themselves in a popular way about the results of science, but also those who learn something from their newspaper, in the Sunday supplements, about the way the world is being explored in the present, that everywhere the opinion is established that whatever is not found only through the scientific way of thinking is simply unscientific; that one is only enlightened if one no longer speaks about the spiritual at all, if one does not fall back into the outdated superstition of still somehow speaking about the spiritual. It is in the flesh and blood of our contemporaries – as I said, even those who draw their view of the world from the Sunday supplement of their newspaper – it is in the flesh and blood that what the great naturalist du Bois-Reymond, a great naturalist, said at a leading naturalists' meeting in the 1870s (this has almost been forgotten today) that science ends where supernaturalism begins, that is, where life begins in the face of the spirit. This has led to the establishment of the prejudice that anyone who somehow speaks of a consideration of spiritual life cannot be a scientist.

But because the natural-scientific directions have developed so strictly that they are applicable only to the sensual, a very particularly constituted spiritual science must stand beside them, which today can lead man to the spirit, while in earlier centuries and millennia he was led to the spirit by the contemplation of nature itself.

Now in our time there is still a significant prejudice prevailing, a prejudice that exists in the general public, but also exists in the chairs of philosophy professors, especially those who deal with spiritual life, a prejudice that prevents the human being from being considered in the right scientific way, a prejudice about whose historical origin one could tell a lot. This prejudice consists in the fact that as soon as one comes to speak of the purely physical aspect of the human being, one does not want to consider that one must distinguish in the supersensible being of the human being the soul and the spiritual.

Everyone who speaks about this relationship today - as I said, within the broad limits that I have indicated - speaks of the human being as consisting of body and soul. But if one speaks of the human being in this way, then it is impossible to penetrate to an understanding of this human being by scientific means; it is, if I may use a comparison, as if someone has a chemically composed substance that contains three components and he absolutely wants to deny that a third component is present, that only two are there. He organizes the entire investigation in such a way that he only wants to find two components; if he breaks it down into two components, then he will always and always have a confusion either of the third with the first or of the second with the first or of the third with the second. And so it is with today's scientific view of the human being. In the supersensible, spirit and soul are thrown together. That is why I wanted to choose the topic 'The human being as a spiritual being and a soul being' for today's reflection, to point out what kind of prejudice has to be overcome in order to arrive at a corresponding scientific view of the human being.

Now, what is the actual situation regarding the division of the human supersensible being into soul and spirit? We can form a preliminary idea about this if we consider that the human being, as he is, experiences the physical between birth and death or, let us say, conception, that the human being also experiences the physical. We must be clear about the fact that hunger, thirst and the need to breathe, for example, are basically experiences of the soul. We experience hunger and thirst inwardly, emotionally; we feel a certain mood arising from this or that need to breathe.

If a person wants to explore the physical basis of hunger and thirst and the need to breathe, he must not stop at inner perception, he must not, for example, deny himself food in order to experience severe hunger, or overload his stomach to see what it is like to be satiated. In this field, one would never delude oneself that by mere introspection, by observing what it feels like to be more or less hungry and thirsty, one can learn something about what corresponds to hunger, thirst, and the need to breathe in the body.

The science of physical life has its special methods, its special types of research, to see what is going on in the body while we are hungry or when the comfortable feeling of satiety has set in. Whether it is right or wrong is not of interest to us; but physical research, which goes from what is merely experienced inwardly in the soul to physical processes, examines the chemical changes in the blood that occur when we are hungry, and so on. In order to recognize what is physically at the root of this kind of soul life, which I have just described, physical research must go from the soul to the physical, and it is admitted that for the person who only lives in ordinary consciousness, lives in the everyday consciousness, all these processes that take place in the body in chemical and physical terms while he experiences something like hunger or the general comfortable mood of his state of health, that these processes remain unconscious.

What does a person in their ordinary consciousness know about their body? What little they observe and recognize through external perception with their senses, that is explained by the science we call physics; but what physics provides is not conscious in the ordinary life of the soul.

Spiritual research shows, in turn, that what underlies the human soul as spirit is the same on the other side as what underlies the human soul as body. Just as little as one can, without any scientific approach to the body, make out anything about the body from the sensation of hunger, thirst and the need to breathe, so little can one, through the mere inner experience of imagining, feeling and willing, as they take place in the of the soul in everyday life, one can know anything about the spirit of the human being; for it is the case that the spirit of the human being, which determines the soul life from the other side as the body, only projects a part of this spirit of the human being into everyday life, just as it does of the body.

Just as one can perceive the body through one's eyes, so one cannot know anything about the soul that only physical research can tell us. From the spirit, the ability to concentrate our soul activity, which we summarize by saying that we think, feel and will, penetrates into the soul. This focusing of the soul life on an ego, which otherwise remains an indeterminate concept, is what projects from the spirit into the ordinary soul life, just as what projects from the bodily life lies before the eyes, without one investigating.

But just as one must proceed from this to physical research, so one must proceed from what is experienced in the soul in imagining, feeling and willing, and from what projects from the spirit, by combining the imagining, feeling and willing in the I, which is as inclined to the soul life as the physical form is inclined to the eye from the other side, ... [...] one must move beyond everything that can be experienced in the soul to a science of the spirit, to that which, from the spirit, determines these processes of imagining, feeling and willing just as hunger and thirst determine bodily processes, which can only be found through physical research.

Admittedly, other research methods are needed to explore the mind than those of physical science; but it must be emphasized with full clarity that no matter how far-reaching the study of, for example, mere inner life may be, it can never lead to real spiritual science. Just as increasing hunger or thirst or the need to breathe or satiation cannot lead to ordinary science, to teaching anatomy and physiology; just as little can mere mystical immersion – however intimate – mere living into ideas, into feelings, that can never lead to an understanding of spiritual reality. Only a real expansion of the field of observation from the inner soul life to the spirit, which is present outside of us and with us, as well as to nature, which is present outside of us and with us, can seriously lead to this; for this nature, which is present outside of us and with us, organizes our body, and this spirit, which is present outside of us and with us, organizes our own spirit. The soul life then develops between the body and the spirit through the interrelations between spirit and body.

In this process, however, the methods that lead to the knowledge of the spirit are to be understood in a spiritual sense. One can never come to the spirit through external activity, no matter how spiritual it may be, because the spirit is only given in the supersensible. If one only strives to learn something about the spirit through external activity, one shows that one actually has no understanding of how to come to the spirit at all. The point is this: just as one must pass from the soul-life, from hunger and thirst, to the soul-dead in the bodily life in order to gain physical science, physiology and biology, so one must pass from the soul-dead to the spirit by strengthening the soul life, by bringing in completely new elements of the soul life.

Now I must emphasize that what I have often stated here and am stating again today in principle as a path of research into the spiritual world is not meant to be taken as a recommendation for everyone to immediately go this way into the spiritual world. And those who, in order to discredit spiritual science, repeatedly emphasize that only those who have had experiences in the spiritual world should actually speak about spiritual science, fall into the same contradiction as those who say that only those who research in them should speak about chemistry and physics.

No, just as it is not an unjustified belief in authority to include in general human education what chemistry, physics and so on research, it is just as little an unjustified belief in authority to include in general human education what spiritual science is able to research; but it is true that the methods of spiritual science must become generally known today, and one finds more detailed information about what I will now only hint at in principle in all the details in my books: “How to Know Higher Worlds,” “Theosophy” and “Secret Science,” “The Riddle of Man,” “The Riddle of Souls,” and so on. There you will find a detailed description of the facts and the path that leads into the spiritual world.

Today, however, it is necessary to talk about this matter because it is desirable, according to the whole spiritual constitution of our time, that as many people as possible should follow the path that leads at least to the point from which one can bear witness that the spiritual life is a reality. And basically anyone can come to this point if they take the instructions of the books mentioned into account in some way.

But even if one did not want to do this, if one did not want to enter the spiritual world, then it would still be valuable to know how the person who presents himself as a spiritual researcher presents the results from the spiritual world and how he has arrived at these research results; because one must actually know what the spiritual researcher's findings are based on. One will be convinced when one gets to know a method that one can already judge well with the ordinary healthy human understanding whether the spiritual researcher says something absurd, foolish, stupid, fantastic, dreamy, or whether he is able to show a way that makes it seem to the healthy human understanding that one is really finding something spiritual.

Now, if I am to characterize in principle the path the spiritual researcher takes, I must say: the spiritual researcher must transform the ordinary feeling, the ordinary imagining, the ordinary will impulses; he must shape them in a different way, in such a way that that he really goes beyond mere thinking, feeling and willing, that he comes to a real insight into spiritual life, just as one comes, by going beyond the life of hunger and thirst, to a real insight into the life of the body.

Now, dear ones, there is very often the idea that physics is difficult and that you have to have some self-control to come to the strict scientific methods of physics. That is one reason why one commits oneself to the physical science, one reason besides the other, that although the physical science is officially recognized, that one can make one's way in life with it and so on, but one has the idea that spiritual research must be something easy, otherwise one would rather leave it entirely. One has the idea that one can enter into the spirit with a few transformations of one's ordinary concepts.

Now it must be emphasized that compared to what is actually the case, what I now want to describe, what is actually the path of spiritual research, the study of chemical, physical and biological methods is easy and that progress on the path of spiritual research requires patience and perseverance, depending on the various human talents that are available for this purpose, may take a shorter or longer time, but nevertheless, even if there is a strong aptitude for exploring spiritual life, it often takes many years to make any progress in just one or the other direction, even if there is the necessary seriousness of purpose in exploring spiritual life. Thus, what can be given as a description of spiritual research paths appears relatively simple; but to really put it into practice requires patience and perseverance and, above all, a strong inner energy and a certain courage of thought.

I would like to start with a comparison in which I want to show what it takes to get from the physical or mental world into the spiritual world. Each of you knows that if you have learned something by heart and recite it, it is good if you do not observe yourself while reciting it. If you want to listen to yourself reciting something you have memorized, you will stutter and get stuck. The spiritual activity that unfolds when reciting a poem cannot be fully experienced if you want to stand by as a self-observer.

So we know that self-observation is difficult. Nevertheless, not only that one observes oneself when reciting a poem, but that it is necessary to enter the spiritual world by observing one's own thinking, feeling and willing. There are philosophers who describe it as a characteristic of the human soul life that one cannot observe oneself in this way. For these philosophers, of course, the spiritual scientific path is from the outset an impossible one, because they understand what one can already do as a peculiarity of the soul, and what one must first learn, they consider as an impossibility. If you want to become a spiritual researcher, you have to learn not only to observe yourself when you recite a poem, for example, but also to stand beside yourself, as it were. You must not only achieve this through constant practice, but it is necessary and indispensable to achieve that you evoke the course of thoughts and feelings in the soul and at the same time stand beside them, so to speak.

You see, we in the West do not have the opportunity, nor should we even try, to penetrate the spiritual world in the way that the spirits of the Orient do. The methods of the West must be different from those of the Orient. But still, we can sometimes listen when an Oriental, who by his very nature is much more attuned to self-observation than we are, says something.

In an excellent essay that was recently published by Rabindranath Tagore, who is well known for receiving the Nobel Prize for his poetry, there is a brief comment about introspection that is meaningful because it comes from the soul of someone who is more familiar with introspection of the soul than most Western thinkers are. He – Tagore – points out the necessity of self-observation in relation to public culture as well; but he says: I know how difficult it is to observe oneself, and I know that the one who is drunk stubbornly denies his drunkenness; if he had self-observation, he would hardly be able to deny it. Of course, this is not only the case for the drunkard, it is the case for people in general, that self-observation, penetrating into what is within themselves, causes them enormous difficulties. But it must happen if one really wants to come to knowledge of the spiritual world.

And so, anyone who wants to penetrate into the spiritual world must increasingly learn to separate what takes place in thoughts, feelings and will from what is actually in him, and to live in a different element by putting aside what is otherwise in him and observing. In this way he must come to enter from the ordinary life of the soul into the experience of the spiritual. One must, as it were, expel, as one recites the poem when observing oneself, one must expel thinking, feeling and willing, and one thereby comes into the position - as strange and paradoxical as it may sound at first - if one does it again and again the energy with which one otherwise drives the chemical method in the outer world, one comes to develop in a completely healthy way what one can call 'having I-consciousness', having self-consciousness, but not in one's thinking, feeling and willing, but outside of it.

And when such spiritual scientific methods are applied, it becomes real, a reality, that the person can say to themselves: I am outside of my body. This consciousness, which is then an experience, which is then a view, this consciousness penetrates, that the person no longer feels with his I in his thinking, feeling and willing, as always, but that he stands outside of it and that he now knows: I am still a being, even when I have left thinking, feeling and willing, which is initially dependent on my body!

What still seems grotesque to so many people today, what they ridicule, that one can lay aside one's body and stand beside it, is a fact for him who advances in spiritual research in the appropriate way. It is a fact, although one does not, I might say, stand outside the physical body in a duplication of it, but rather in the spiritual. This can be achieved through a life that only takes place in the spirit. Just as the workings of chemical methods are in space, so too is what the spiritual researcher must undertake, something that takes place in the spirit.

Dearly beloved, when you bring what I have just described to a certain perfection, then you will actually have a proper idea of what is coming together in the little word 'I'. You pronounce this 'I' and you may even believe that by pronouncing the 'I', you have the spiritual part of the human being. One has no more of this spiritual part of man than one has of the physical, chemical processes in the body when one looks at this body from the outside through one's eyes. It is even remarkable that soul researchers, for example the very outstanding Theodor Ziehen, talk about the ego.

One can see from the way even soul researchers talk about the ego that this ego only turns its outside to them. After Ziehen had given very beautiful and meaningful lectures on physiological psychology, which were meaningful from a purely scientific point of view, he said to his audience: “Gentlemen, the ego is by no means something very simple. When you think about what the ego is, what comes to mind?” First of all, your body comes to mind, then your relationships with the outside world, then your property and ownership, then perhaps your names and titles – he leaves out the medals – then all the experiences of your past come to mind and so on. In short, Theodor Ziehen mentions everything that can actually tell us very little about the self. Then he says: However, metaphysicians often say that the ego is something special in addition to what comes to mind, such as names, titles and so on, but that this is just a fiction. Again an example where a researcher who is to be taken very seriously – I am also full of appreciation and admiration for him – explains the scientifically researchable in an exemplary manner, but points out that one cannot find the spiritual in this field; but then also discredits this spiritual as a fiction.

To reduce this spiritual element, this I, to a single word does not prove at all that, just because one can reduce it to a single word, one also knows something about the nature of the I. Every person knows how to pronounce the word “sleep”; but the fact that one can pronounce the word “sleep” does not indicate what the nature of the soul is between falling asleep and waking up. One only speaks about something that presents itself as a gap, that actually presents itself as something unfilled in life.

It is the same when one speaks about the self: one points to something about which one has no view. When one sees a colored area and the color stops in the middle of the area, one sees a black dot. One actually sees nothing, one designates nothingness. So when you say the little word “I” in your ordinary consciousness, you don't mean anything in particular; you almost mean a nothing, actually just a spiritual point. But if you expand your consciousness by becoming your own spectator, as I have indicated, then you learn to recognize something very meaningful about this ego, you learn to recognize that what the essence of the ego is is basically always misinterpreted by ordinary consciousness.

I will use a comparison to suggest how the sense of self, with all that belongs to it, is misinterpreted in ordinary consciousness. Imagine someone were to examine the human bodily constitution and find that lungs and air belong together. Because lungs and air belong together in a certain way, he would declare that the air inhaled and exhaled in the lungs actually came into being in the lungs; the lungs gradually develop in the human body in such a way that they generate air. Of course, one cannot arrive at this error, because through physical science one finds that one not only exhales air that arises from the lungs, but that one first inhales air in order to be able to exhale it. One can only arrive at this through contemplation.

In this way one acquires an understanding of how one is to relate to one's self. Just as the air does not develop in the lungs, so the self cannot develop out of the human body. Just as one draws air into the lungs and releases it again, so the I is present in the objective spiritual life. The lungs are not the source of air, nor is the body the source of the I. The I is taken up into the body and, as it were, exhaled out of the body as the human being passes through the gate of death. But to recognize this, one must first have a real insight into the I.

Through the true self-observation described above, and not through the self-observation of which mystics speak, one must come to develop the sense of self in the spiritual, outside of the physical. Then one knows that one has grasped what is absorbed by the body but is not produced by the body. Only when one has grasped this does one have an idea of what the human being actually receives with his body; only then does one arrive at valid ideas about what can be summarized by the words inheritance and so on. Then one can speak biologically knowing that what is inherited from one's ancestors does not develop an I. It does not develop an I in the course of life, but is there to receive an I that must descend from the spiritual world.

The I must be received by the body; just as air enters the lungs from the outer space, so the I comes from the spirit. The I and that which is accomplished through the I can never be inherited in any way, even if it is absorbed and thus becomes dependent on the physical. Air is also absorbed into the lungs and, depending on the function of the lungs and their constitution, the lungs experience life in the way that lungs can experience life. Likewise, what we have inherited from our parents as formative forces is experienced by the I; in this way the I presents itself in such a way that it dresses in its activities in what we have inherited from our ancestors; but one only comes to an idea of what the true relationship between the physical and the spiritual I is if one acquires the corresponding direct insight.

Spiritual research is a progression from ordinary judgment to such judgment, which is acquired through seeing consciousness, if I may use the term, although it is often misunderstood. Spiritual research can only be attained by progressing from ordinary judgment to the seer's judgment, before which the spiritual is spread out in a spiritual external world just as the physical is spread out before the physical senses of man. If one applies what I have described, self-observation, one comes so far as to know through direct insight that what lives in the human being comes into his body from a spiritual world and goes out again through death. One comes to recognize that which is not bodily in the body, but is spirit, and which, in connection with the body, brings about the human soul, the feeling and the will.

But one must go further if one wants to come to a real knowledge of the spiritual life. One arrives, so to speak, at a clear distinction between the bodily-mental and the spiritual, but one does not arrive at a concrete view of the spiritual; one arrives at self-awareness, at what the spiritual self is, but one does not arrive at a view of the world in which this spiritual self lives, just as the bodily person lives in the physical environment. For this to happen, not only must self-observation be present, but the whole life of the human being's imagination must also be changed in a different direction.

In our ordinary life, our mental life proceeds in such a way that we orient ourselves to the processes that take place outside in space and time. We rightly set up our ideas in such a way that they follow the spatial and temporal course of beings and processes. Above all, anyone who wants to observe the spiritual must get away from being guided by external spatial and temporal processes. And he can free himself from this by introducing the will into the human life of ideas to an ever greater extent. This is achieved by tearing oneself away from the self-evident life of ideas of everyday life. In order to tear oneself away from the ordinary course of ideas, exercises of the soul, patiently and persistently spent over many years, are also necessary. This is achieved by systematically making such images in the soul that only come through one's own will into the soul.

Let us give an extreme case for this: in ordinary life, we are accustomed to first imagining the earlier, then the later. If you just get into the habit of spending at least one or two minutes each day to imagine an event in reverse, so that you imagine the end and then the previous event and so on backwards, a melody, a drama, and so on, then you have to exert a completely different willpower than the one you are used to applying in the physical world. In short, you have to introduce the forceful will into the world of imagination. I have described in detail how to do this in the aforementioned books. One must practise what can truly be called meditative life, a life of imagination that is completely permeated by will and not under the tyranny of the external world.

Take Theodor Zichen again, he says: The soul life proceeds in such a way that it is actually completely dominated by the associations of ideas, by what the person either puts together from the inner connections of the ideas, or what he puts together in space next to each other or in time one after the other in memory, and so on. — In this way Ziehen describes exactly what is not spiritual in the soul. Everything that is subject to association is unspiritual. Whenever one overcomes this association, whenever one does not proceed in such a way that the ideas associate of their own accord, but instead confronts what happens of its own accord, then one surrenders to the spirit, then one introduces the will into the life of ideas and then you notice that you are gradually moving away from that which is only connected to the body in the life of the imagination, then you notice that you are moving away from it, but also that something completely new is gradually moving into the life of the imagination.

One notices that one is not drawn into a fantastic world, a world that, because it has detached itself from the outside world, links one idea to the next in arbitrariness, but that one really experiences that through something that arises from a completely different side, namely the spiritual side, one also links one idea to the next with necessity - not by imagine a table when the chair is not present, as one necessarily does in the world of the senses under the influence of the external world of the senses - then one gradually becomes aware, when one has first brought the imagination to free itself from bodily compulsion by introducing the will, then one becomes aware that something settles into the inner life of the imagination, which, as a purely spiritual impulse, elevates one above arbitrariness. Arbitrariness is only the way. One frees oneself by introducing the will into the world of ideas.

But by going through this practice, one goes from merely shaping meditative thought complexes to the point that a spiritual necessity creeps in, which links one thought to another in the same way that only the external spatial sequence links one thought to another in the sensory world. Dear honored attendees, then one is in the process – I may use the expression, although it can be easily misunderstood, but it is only meant as I have explained it – not only to get something into one's ideas through external sensory perception, but to experience spiritual inspiration flowing into one's ideas. One must not take this expression superstitiously, but in the sense of inner, spiritual experience. Only then does one stand in the concrete spiritual world; whereas before, one only has imaginations, only that which can depend on one's own will, now flows into the soul life, in that the life of imagination has become something completely different, in that one has freed oneself from the merely soul experience, now the spiritual experience flows in.

I know very well what the objections to such a thing are. I know very well what objections can be raised against it; but anyone who has become familiar with this outpouring of the spiritual world into the world of imagination over decades also knows how to connect a real concept with the word inspiration, and knows that what is referred to here as inspiration may, in the true sense of the word, be placed alongside external perception from the spiritual side. Above all, he knows one thing: you can come and tell him that if you believe that something is inspired into your ideas, then you are deluding yourself, but only your known ideas, which you have absorbed here and there, come back to you as reminiscences, and because you do not know how these things have flowed into your imaginative life, you believe that they come to you from a spiritual world.

I know how much weight such an objection carries, but anyone who knows what is at the root of it, and has known it through years of experience, knows one thing above all: no prejudice can this field, for the simple reason that he has experienced it too often, when he is truly devoted to inspiration, that the things one comes to know in the spiritual realm always turn out differently than one's preconceptions assume.

These are precisely the most meaningful experiences and the most important spiritual experiences: You accept your spiritual path to some spiritual being or phenomenon, and lo and behold, you may have formed certain ideas about what it should look like in the spiritual world, based on the ordinary world, on what you can perceive externally through the senses, through the ordinary mind; these ideas will always be proven wrong.

And when one really experiences what flows into the world of ideas from the spiritual side, then one knows, especially after observing the most blatant cases, that one cannot get what one quite unexpectedly gets from the spiritual side into the realm of ideas from the sensory side , then you know that you are really surprised by everything you have not only experienced but that was possible to experience when you enter the spiritual world, just as you are surprised in the sensory world when you have a new experience that you have not yet experienced.

Thus one can, by means of spiritual experiences, very well distinguish these spiritual experiences from everything that can be experienced in the sensory world. What matters is to understand correctly what I mean by the words, which every spiritual researcher knows well: things always turn out differently than one expects, and in countless cases they turn out differently. This is how one can enter the spiritual world when one enters into what I have described as self-observation from this side into the spiritual world. Then one enters into a concrete world; one does not just speak of a spiritual world in general. One then knows that pantheistic contemplation of the spirit is no more valuable than if someone would disdain to look at individual plants, animals and minerals and would always just say: “Nature, nature, nature,” instead of studying them individually. One would not feel enlightened, but would simply say to the person concerned: ‘You just know nothing about individual plants and entities of the different kingdoms of nature.’ But one considers him to be particularly spiritually advanced who does not distinguish individual spirits and spiritual processes, but speaks generally pantheistically of spirit and spirit and spirit.

Now, in addition to what is achieved through this second principle, which I have characterized in principle, there is another thing that is added to the achievement with regard to the ego. Through true self-observation, one comes to recognize the ego as a spiritual being that is distinct from the bodily beings. Now, by adding real spiritual insight to self-observation, one learns to recognize that everything that is experienced in the self between birth or, let us say, conception and death, is experienced by the self, and that this is not only dominated by such forces and impulses as lie within life between birth and death; through insight one comes to see beyond birth and death. We now know that just as when water rises in waves, wind has struck it from the outside, we know that what happens in the human emotional and imaginative life between birth and death is influenced by the forces with which the soul was connected in the time before it united with the physical body.

We get to know prenatal life through direct observation, we get to know the life that follows death through observation, we learn to recognize that although this I in the body expresses itself in the known phenomena of the soul for the external sense world, but that in the subconscious is further developed, which is the eternal in human nature, that these impulses for the eternal already exist in the physical body, but are covered by the physical body, that through death, enriched by the experience of physical experience, the soul moves out through the gate of death. For one does not only learn to speculate about the eternal in human nature in this way, but one learns, by becoming free, to recognize that which passes through births and deaths.

Thus spiritual science is the kind of research that does not develop speculation about the spiritual life, not a mere philosophy about the spiritual life, but that develops spiritual insight. The one who has this spiritual vision and has thus become a spiritual researcher can speak about the spiritual world – the spiritual world in which the soul is between death and a new birth – in the same way that one is able to speak through physical consciousness about the sensory world in which the human being is between birth and death.

And this spiritual insight, even if the individual does not acquire it at first, it leads to the fact that the spiritual researcher is able to describe the phenomena of the human soul life in such a way that they become understandable. And, following on from this, it can be said that one does not have to be a spiritual researcher, a seer, to find the result of spiritual research plausible. Anyone who picks up a watch after being told how a watchmaker made it will also recognize the product of human intelligence , human ability, even if he has not himself spent time in a watchmaker's shop watching how a watchmaker makes a watch. Not everyone needs to be a seer to recognize the results of seeing from an honest sense of truth, but one must develop a seer's awareness. Just as one must develop the skill to make a watch in order to make a watch, one must develop the visionary abilities to be able to say about the spiritual world what the other person can judge by common sense when the visionary says it.

But this healthy human understanding must not be affected by all kinds of prejudices, which believe that they are standing on the firm ground of natural science, but have gained nothing from this except what can be gained from the fact that natural science points to a supersensible realm, but in turn discredits this realm by saying: true science consists in the study of the physical world.

What is important to emphasize is that spiritual research leads into a real world that surrounds us just as the physical world surrounds us. Before spiritual science, a world arises in the same way as the physical human body arises when it was previously blind and it is operated on, the physical world of the eye; in the same way, the spiritual world arises for the spiritual person. Through self-observation, man learns to recognize what is eternal in him. He learns to recognize through spiritual vision how the eternal in him is related to the eternal in the external world. The eternal learns to recognize the eternal. This shows us that, in addition to what the human being experiences as the mere soul, we have to add, from spiritual science, the spiritual, just as we have to add, from physiological science, the physical to what the human being also experiences, from the side of the body, as soul. The soul stands, as it were, between the spiritual and the physical, so that it experiences the transitory, temporal on one side, and the eternal on the other.

Indeed, my dear attendees, through spiritual science, what we might call the riddle of immortality really does enter a field that is strictly scientific. Today, many people still consider this to be impossible; just as there was a time when people refused to penetrate from the soul to the body, to a real dissection, so today they still refuse to penetrate from the soul to the spirit. What Galileo and others achieved, namely to penetrate from the soul to the body, spiritual science has to accomplish on the other side, to penetrate from the soul to the spirit, not only in an abstract way, but in such a way that one really also recognizes that as soon as he frees himself in his imagination from the body – through seership or by passing through the gate of death, he enters into a real spiritual world – that he then finds himself among concrete spiritual beings and spiritual processes, as here among concrete sensory beings and sensual processes.

The next lecture will deal with the details. For now, it only remains for me to say that what is revealed by this method of spiritual insight can truly be placed alongside the ordinary scientific path, which is used today for the knowledge of external nature, without being hindered by any kind of fear. Particularly when one really learns to recognize natural science, then one finds that piece by piece that which spiritual insight offers is confirmed by natural science, and one learns to recognize the fact that it can become so meaningful for the soul. If one stands only on the ground of natural science and is captivated by the successful methods of natural science, then one can understandably come to the prejudice that, because these methods have become so sure, so sure in nature, the study of the spirit is impossible. But if one becomes acquainted with spiritual science in its details and does not remain shod in leather, then as a spiritual researcher one also comes to recognize natural science. One comes to know something quite different from what the natural scientist can come to know compared to the spiritual scientist.

The natural scientist very easily comes to reject spiritual research, but the spiritual researcher never comes to reject natural research; he will see the scientific facts in the right light and be able to recognize their significance when he knows that the scientific facts are correctly understood, only that they appear from higher points of view as emanations of spiritual life. Those who penetrate spiritual research in this way will also be freed from the prejudice that spiritual research could be detrimental to any religious confession.

In particular, the religious side very easily makes common cause against what wants to be a new spiritual element in our cultural life. If people recognized the necessity of placing spiritual science alongside natural science, if they recognized the basic character of spiritual research, if they recognized that it strives for the human being as a spiritual being, just as biology and physiology strive for the knowledge of the human being as a physical being, going beyond the merely soul-related, then they would not believe that this spiritual science could be detrimental to any religious confession. One would find that while the materialistic creed, which has been widely adopted in modern times as a result of the external scientific approach, can very easily, but not necessarily, become a religious creed, spiritual science, on the other hand, leads man back to the spirit [and he] thereby - because he can now also gain knowledge of the spirit - will turn again to religious life, to which the longing of many more people in the present day goes than people are actually aware of.

However, even today we still experience many misunderstandings in this area. In an excellent essay in the “Christian World”, Dr. Rittelmeyer recently pointed out what I understand as spiritual science, how it can provide a foundation for religious belief, and how it can open up a path even for those who, through misleading research into nature, have been led away from their religious confession, to return to it. All sorts of objections were raised from a side that also enjoys a great deal of respect. Above all, because it is important today, I would like to mention one point very briefly; the objection was raised: Yes, this spiritual research requires that a person perform arbitrary soul exercises in order to find his way into the spiritual world through arbitrary development of his soul. That is a wrong – that was even remarked – a dangerous, a tempting way; because one would actually enter into the spiritual life only involuntarily, when it presents itself of its own accord. Yes, that was mentioned, that the disposition to enter into the spirit is as specific a disposition as the musical or mathematical disposition.

One should understand that man can find himself as a spiritual researcher, that it cannot be a special talent to come to the spirit, but must be a general human predisposition. But if it is objected that, like a grace, spiritual research must also come, the one who says this does not understand the essential of the spiritual. Because they do not find the spirit in the soul, today's soul researchers describe the soul life as if the ideas socialized themselves because the body forces us to do so. They do this because one is dependent on the body. One reaches the spirit when one becomes independent of what the body accomplishes. One reaches the spirit by breaking free in freedom from the merely physical life. No matter how much mysticism one can muster, no matter how much one can talk about the soul, if it is not gained through the free exercises of the soul, through the active life of the soul, then it is only experienced or acquired in a bodily or lowly-soul way.

The truly spiritual begins where one frees oneself from the body and can only be explored by gaining knowledge through freedom, through the activity of the will, and through the kind of activity that arises from freedom. Only by becoming free from the body can one attain the consciousness that otherwise remains in the depths of the soul life in man.

But the consciousness that remains in the depths of the soul life in ordinary experience can be explored, and what is freed when a person passes through the gate of death, which is otherwise covered by the soul experiences dominated by the body. So one can say that such an objection actually provides the proof, as well as a side that often finds recognition has no concept, no idea at all, of the real spiritual, as one describes the soul, which is dominated by the body, as the spiritual.

Now, my dear audience, such sides are often, such currents are often, which in a completely misleading way make front against the spiritual science, as I tried to characterize it again from the most diverse points of view. This spiritual science itself cannot relate to other directions in this way; it knows that it does not need to exclude anything else, that it does not need to make a front against others in order to maintain itself. This spiritual science, which seeks the spirit in the soul in the manner indicated through genuine science, just as the physical science investigates the processes of the body in relation to the experience of the soul, this spiritual science can say: Do not be misled, enter into the natural science, recognize everything that the natural scientist has to say! You will understand it no worse than he does. You will understand better than he does, and you will do complete justice to him if you open yourselves up to what he says.

Spiritual science is not shared by the condemnation that one finds again and again among the so-called monists, who always want to confront themselves, despite their position being very shaky, on the firm ground of natural science, and who avoid the spiritual because they believe that one cannot engage with spiritual science because no valid concepts exist for it, or the like. No, the scientific way of thinking, which at the same time wants to be a worldview, provides narrow concepts that do not lead into the spiritual; spiritual science provides concepts that not only lead into the spiritual, but even into natural science. Therefore, it says that man acquires as much natural science as possible. Spiritual science has nothing to fear from it; on the contrary, spiritual science will just as little describe a religious path to anyone as something that he should avoid.

Spiritual science will tell everyone: If you are equipped with the ideas about the spirit that true spiritual science can give you, then your soul is also suited, through the strength and power of these ideas, to follow the religious path with all its intensity, to take in what your religion wants to give you in its revelations in the true sense of the word. It is not religious prejudice, which is not really religious but rather a prejudice of the representatives of religion, that needs to be adopted by spiritual science. This prevents one from dealing with something else, which even finds the other path tempting, but says: Go to church and religion, they will be able to give you, by virtue of your spiritual science, what they would otherwise not be able to give you if you understand spiritual science in truth. Go into life. That which one acquires through spiritual science gives such ideas and concepts that they do not make the ideas of practical life the same as they are today, where people consider themselves practical when they are mere fantasists.

Spiritual science, even if one is not a seer, will give the ideas of practical life flexibility, direction, energy, so that one becomes more practical for ordinary external life. It does not turn one away from external life. It gives one moral direction and support, it even gives skills for external techniques. Go into life, not into asceticism! Life will not destroy spiritual science, but on the contrary, this life will confirm spiritual science everywhere, and I could add: for my part, go to Johannes Müller yourself. I will not run the risk of saying: Johannes Müller's path is a dangerous, tempting one, as Johannes Müller recently wrote, that one should avoid the spiritual scientific path because it is a temptation. I will not say to anyone: Avoid the path of Johannes Müller! Go to him! You will find the right point of view precisely when you go there with spiritual science. No one who approaches spiritual science with true understanding will be deterred from anything, for spiritual science is intended to lead into the spiritual life in such a way that the rest of life, which is ultimately nothing other than the manifestation of the spiritual, can be more fully understood, more insightfully experienced, more energetically felt and more keenly sensed.

What spiritual science can pour into the human mind and what must become useful for the longings of humanity, which can be perceived today as the most significant longings, but which are often only in the subconscious, if one has true observation of people, this attitude, which can be placed in the human heart to satisfy these longings, I would like to describe as follows: I have said: In the broadest circles, people are dominated by the prejudice that du Bois-Reymond once expressed in the 1870s, but which still haunts souls today; that science can only extend to the sensual, that it cannot explore the supersensible, can investigate the supersensible, but that science ends where the supersensible life, the spiritual life, the eternal actually begins. Spiritual science should show humanity that the opposite attitude corresponds to true insight into world conditions, that one must rather say: even natural science does not penetrate into the true deeper life of nature unless this natural science is permeated by the spirit.

But if we recognize in science itself the necessity of being permeated by the spirit, then we will no longer say that science stops where the supersensible begins, where the spirit begins, but rather the other way around: science of nature also dies, ceases, when we come out of the spirit with our concepts. Even in natural science itself, one needs the spirit for real understanding. Unfortunately, however, for the sake of cognitive comfort, one has gone through a peculiar process in recent decades. One has said to oneself, something I could compare to when someone said: There I have a tree in front of me, it grows and thrives. It draws certain forces out of the earth; but the forces that it draws out are covered by the earth. I will pull the tree out of the earth so that I have it all before me, then I can see it all.

This is how people who think in terms of natural science have done it. They have said: If we look at nature, we do not understand it; so it is rooted in something. We uproot it, we pull it out of its soil, then we survey it. But that natural science, which uproots itself in this way, is like a tree that has been torn out of the ground by the root; it is killed, it dies. And knowledge that is uprooted from spiritual knowledge dies. When the prejudice that is associated with a saying such as that of du Bois-Reymond has passed away: “Where the supersensible begins, science ends,” one will come to the realization and the true attitude towards the spirit and its relationship to man, when one will then substitute the other for du Bois-Reymond's saying: Where knowledge wants to disown the spirit, where knowledge wants to step out of the supersensible and, uprooted, wants to grasp nature, that is where knowledge dies. Not that science stops where the supersensible begins, but where the supersensible ends and knowledge is still sought, that is where this knowledge itself is killed, that is where all striving for knowledge dies.