Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

Riddles of Philosophy
Part II
GA 18

VIII. A Brief Outline of an Approach to Anthroposophy

[ 1 ] If one observes how, up to the present time, the philosophical world conceptions take form, one can see undercurrents in the search and endeavor of the various thinkers, of which they themselves are not aware but by which they are instinctively moved. In these currents there are forces at work that give direction and often specific form to the ideas expressed by these thinkers. Although they do not want to focus their attention on the forces directly, what they have to say often appears as if driven by hidden forces, which they are unwilling to acknowledge and from which they recoil. Forces of this kind live in the thought worlds of Dilthey, Eucken and Cohen. They are led by cognitive powers by which they are unconsciously dominated but that do not find a conscious development within their thought structures.

[ 2 ] Security and certainty of knowledge is being sought in many philosophical systems, and Kant's ideas are more or less taken as its point of departure. The outlook of natural science determines, consciously or unconsciously, the process of thought formation. But it is dimly felt by many that the source of knowledge of the external world must be sought in the self-conscious soul. Almost all of these thinkers are dominated by the question: How can the self-conscious soul be led to regard its inner experiences as a true manifestation of reality? The ordinary world of sense perception has become “illusion” because the self-conscious ego has, in the course of philosophical development, found itself more and more isolated with its subjective experiences. It has arrived at the point where it regards even sense perception merely as inner experience that is powerless to assure being and permanence for them in the world of reality. It is felt how much depends on finding a point of support within the self-conscious ego. But the search stimulated by this feeling only leads to conceptions that do not provide the means of submerging with the ego into a world that provides satisfactory support for existence.

[ 3 ] To explain this fact, one must look at the attitude toward the reality of the external world taken by a soul that has detached itself from that reality in the course of its philosophical development. This soul feels itself surrounded by a world of which it first becomes aware through the senses. But then it also becomes conscious of its own activity, of its own inner creative experience. The soul feels, as an irrefutable truth, that no light, no color can be revealed without the eye's sensitivity for light and color. Thus, it becomes aware of something creative in this activity of the eye. But if the eye produces the color by its spontaneous creation, as it must be assumed in such a philosophy, the question arises: Where do I find something that exists in itself, that does not owe its existence to my own creative power? If even the manifestations of the senses are nothing but results of the activity of the soul, must this not be true to even a higher degree with our thinking, through which we strive for conceptions of a true reality? Is this thinking not condemned to produce pictures that spring from the character of the soul life but can never provide a sure approach to the sources of existence? Questions of this kind emerge everywhere in the development of modern philosophy.

[ 4 ] It will be impossible to find the way out of the confusion resulting from these questions as long as the belief is maintained that the world revealed by the senses constitutes a complete, finished and self-dependent reality that must be investigated in order to know its inner nature. The human soul can arrive at its insights only through a spontaneous inner creativity. This conviction has been described in a previous chapter of this book, “The World as Illusion,” and in connection with the presentation of Hamerling's thoughts. Having reached this conviction, it is difficult to overcome a certain impasse of knowledge as long as one thinks that the world of the senses contains the real basis of its existence within itself and that one therefore has to copy with the inner activity of the soul what lies outside.

[ 5 ] This impasse will be overcome only by accepting the fact that, by its very nature, sense perception does not present a finished self-contained reality, but an unfinished, incomplete reality, or a half-reality, as it were.

As soon as one presupposes that a full reality is gained through perceptions of the sensory world, one is forever prevented from finding the answer to the question: What has the creative mind to add to this reality in the act of cognition? By necessity one shall have to sustain the Kantian option: Man must consider his knowledge to be the inner product of his own mind; he cannot regard it as a process that is capable of revealing a true reality. If reality lies outside the soul, then the soul cannot produce anything that corresponds to this reality, and the result is merely a product of the soul's own organization.

[ 6 ] The situation is entirely changed as soon as it is realized that the human soul does not deviate from reality in its creative effort for knowledge, but that prior to any cognitive activity the soul conjures up a world that is not real. Man is so placed in the world that by the nature of his being he changes things from what they really are. Hamerling is partly right when he says:

Certain stimuli produce the odor within our organ of smell. The rose, therefore, has no fragrance if nobody smells it. . . . If this, dear reader, does not seem plausible to you, if your mind stirs like a shy horse when it is confronted with this fact, do not bother to read another line; leave this book and all others that deal with philosophical things unread, for you lack the ability that is necessary for this purpose, that is, to apprehend a fact without bias and to adhere to it in your thoughts. (Compare pages of this volume.)

How the sensory world appears when man is confronted with it, depends without a doubt on the nature of the soul. Does it not follow then that this appearance of the world is a product of man's soul? An unbiased observation shows, however, that the unreal character of the external sense world is caused by the fact that when man is directly confronted by things of the world, he suppresses something that really belongs to them. If he unfolds a creative inner life that lifts from the depths of his soul the forces that lie dormant in them, he adds something to the part perceived by the senses and thereby turns a half-reality to its entirety. It is due to the nature of the soul that, at its first contact with things, it extinguishes something that belongs to them. For this reason, things appear to the senses not as they are in reality but as they are modified by the soul. Their delusive character (or their mere appearance) is caused by the fact that the soul has deprived them of something that really belongs to them.

Inasmuch as man does not merely observe things, he adds something to them in the process of knowledge that reveals their full reality. The mind does not add anything to things in the process of cognition that would have to be considered as an unreal element, but prior to the process of knowledge it has deprived these things of something that belongs to their true reality. It will be the task of philosophy to realize that the world accessible to man is an “illusion” before it is approached in the process of cognition. This process, however, leads the way toward a full understanding of reality. The knowledge that man creates during the process of cognition seems to be an inner manifestation of the soul only because he must, before the act of cognition, reject what comes from the nature of things. He cannot see at first the real nature of things when he encounters them in mere observation. In the process of knowledge he unveils what was first concealed. If he regards as a reality what he had at first perceived, he will now realize that he has added the results of his cognitive activity to reality. As soon as he recognizes that what was apparently produced by himself has to be sought in the things themselves, that he merely failed to see it previously, he will then find that the process of knowing is a real process by which the soul progressively unites with world reality. Through it, it expands its inner isolated experience to the experience of the world.

[ 7 ] In a short work, Truth and Science, published in 1892, the author of the present book made a first attempt to prove philosophically what has been briefly described. Perspectives are indicated in this book that are necessary to the philosophy of the present age if it is to overcome the obstacles it has encountered in its modern development. A philosophical point of view is outlined in this essay in the following words:

The initial form in which reality confronts the ego is not its true manifestation but the final form, which the ego fashions out of it, is. The first form is altogether without significance for the objective world; it is of importance only as a basis for the processes of cognition. Therefore, it is not the form of the world that is presented by theory that must be considered subjective but the one the ego encounters initially as in mere perception.

A further exposition of this point of view is given in the author's later philosophical work, Philosophy of Freedom (1894) (translated also with the title, Philosophy of Spiritual Activity). There an attempt is made to give the philosophical foundations for a conception that was outlined in Truth and Science.

It is not due to the objects that they are given to us at first without their corresponding concept, but to our mental organization. Our whole being functions in such a way that from every real thing the relevant elements come to us from two sources, from perceiving and from thinking. The way I am organized for apprehending the things has nothing to do with the nature of the things themselves. The gap between perceiving and thinking exists only from the moment that I, as a spectator, confront the things.

And later on it is stated:

The percept is that part of reality that is given objectively; the concept the part that is given subjectively, through intuition. Our mental organization tears the reality apart into these two factors. The one factor presents itself to perception, the other to intuition. Only the union of the two, that is, the percept fitting systematically into the universe, constitutes the full reality. If we take mere percepts by themselves we have no reality but rather disconnected chaos. If we take by itself the law and order connecting the percepts then we have nothing but abstract concepts. Reality is not contained in the abstract concept. It is, however, contained in thoughtful observation, which does not one-sidedly consider either concept or percept alone, but rather the union of the two.

[ 8 ] In accepting this point of view we shall be able to think of mental life and of reality as united in the self-conscious ego. This is the conception toward which philosophical development has tended since the Greek era and that has shown its first distinctly recognizable traces in the world conception of Goethe. The awareness arises that this self-conscious ego does not experience itself as isolated and divorced from the objective world, but its detachment from this world is experienced merely as an illusion of its consciousness. This isolation can be overcome if man gains the insight that at a certain stage of his development he must give a provisional form to his ego in order to suppress from his consciousness the forces that unite him with the world. If these forces exerted their influences in his consciousness without interruption, he would never have developed a strong, independent self-consciousness. He would be incapable of experiencing himself as a self-conscious ego. The development of self-consciousness, therefore, actually depends on the fact that the mind is given the opportunity to perceive the world without that part of reality that is extinguished by the self-conscious ego prior to an act of cognition.

The world forces belonging to this part of reality withdraw into obscurity in order to allow the self-conscious ego to shine forth in full power. The ego must realize that it owes its self-knowledge to a fact that spreads a veil over the knowledge of the world. It follows that everything that stimulates the soul to a vigorous, energetic experience of the ego, conceals at the same time the deeper foundations in which this ego has its roots. All knowledge acquired by the ordinary consciousness tends to strengthen the self-conscious ego. Man feels himself as a self-conscious ego through the fact that he perceives an external world with his senses, that he experiences himself as being outside this external world and that, at a certain stage of scientific investigation, he feels himself in relation to this external world in such a way that it appears to him as “illusion.” Were it not so, the self-conscious ego would not emerge. If, therefore, in the act of knowledge one attempts merely to copy what is observed before knowledge begins, one does not arrive at a true experience of full reality, but only at an image of a “half reality.”

[ 9 ] Once this is admitted to be the situation, one can no longer look for the answer of the riddles of philosophy within the experiences of the soul that appear on the level of ordinary consciousness. It is the function of this consciousness to strengthen the self-conscious ego. To achieve this it must cast a veil over the connection of the ego with the objective world, and it therefore cannot show how the soul is connected with the true world. This explains why a method of knowledge that applies the means of the natural scientific or similar modes of conception must always arrive at a point where its efforts break down. This failing of many modern thinkers has previously been pointed out in this book, for, in the final analysis, all scientific endeavor employs the same mode of thinking that serves to detach the self-conscious ego from the true reality. The strength and greatness of modern science, especially of natural science, is based on the unrestrained application of this method.

[ 10 ] Several philosophers such as Dilthey, Eucken and others, direct philosophical investigation toward the self-observation of the soul. But what they observe are those experiences of the soul that form the basis for the self-conscious ego. Thus, they do not penetrate to the sources in which the experiences of the soul originate. These sources cannot be found where the soul first observes itself on the level of ordinary consciousness. If the soul is to reach these sources, it must go beyond this ordinary consciousness. It must experience something in itself that ordinary consciousness cannot give to it. To ordinary thinking, such an experience appears at first like sheer nonsense. The soul is to experience itself knowingly in an element without carrying its consciousness into that element. One is to transcend consciousness and yet be conscious! But in spite of all this, we shall either continue to get nowhere, or we shall have to open new aspects that will reveal the above mentioned “absurdity” to be only apparently so since it really indicates the direction in which we must look for help to solve the riddles of philosophy.

[ 11 ] One will have to recognize that the path into the “inner region of the soul” must be entirely different from the one that is taken by many philosophies of modern times. [ 12 ] As long as soul experiences are taken the way they present themselves to ordinary consciousness, one will not reach down into the depths of the soul. One will be left merely with what these depths release. Such is the case with Eucken's world conception. It is necessary to penetrate below the surface of the soul. This is, however, not possible by means of the ordinary experiences. The strength of these rests precisely in the fact that they remain in the realm of the ordinary consciousness. The means to penetrate deeper into the soul can be found if one directs one's attention to something that is, to be sure, also at work in the ordinary consciousness, but does not enter it while it is active.

[ 13 ] While man thinks, his consciousness is focused on his thoughts. He wants to conceive something by means of these thoughts; he wants to think correctly in the ordinary sense. He can, however, also direct his attention to something else. He can concentrate his attention on the activity of thinking as such. He can, for instance, place into the center of his consciousness a thought that refers to nothing external, a thought that is conceived like a symbol that has no connection to something external. It is now possible to hold onto such a thought for a certain length of time. One can be entirely absorbed by the concentration on this thought. The important thing with this exercise is not that one lives in thoughts but that one experiences the activity of thinking. In this way, the soul breaks away from an activity in which it is engaged in ordinary thinking.

If such an inner exercise is continued long enough, it will become gradually apparent to the soul that it has now become involved in experiences that will separate it from all those processes of thinking and ideation that are bound to the physical organs. A similar result can be obtained from the activities of feeling and willing and even for sensation, the perception of external things. One can only be successful with this approach if one is not afraid to admit to oneself that self-knowledge cannot be gained by mere introspection, but by concentrating on the inner life that can be revealed only through these exercises. Through continued practice of the soul, that is, by holding the attention on the inner activity of thinking, feeling and willing, it is possible for these “experiences” to become “condensed.” In this state of “condensation” they reveal their inner nature, which cannot be perceived in the ordinary consciousness. [ 14 ] It is through such exercises that one discovers how our soul forces must be so “attenuated” or weakened in producing our ordinary form of consciousness, that they become imperceptible in this state of “attenuation.” The soul exercises referred to consist in the unlimited increase of faculties that are also known to the ordinary consciousness but never reach such a state of concentration. The faculties are those of attention and of loving surrender to the content of the soul's experience. To attain the indicated aim, these abilities must be increased to such a degree that they function as entirely new soul forces.

[ 15 ] If one proceeds in this manner, one arrives at a real inner experience that by its very nature is independent of bodily conditions. This is a life of the spirit that must not be confused with what Dilthey and Eucken call the spiritual world. For what they call the spiritual world is, after all, experienced by man when he depends on his physical organs. The spiritual life that is here referred to does not exist for a soul that is bound to the body.

One of the first experiences that follows the attainment of this new spiritual life is a true insight into the nature of the ordinary mental life. This is actually not produced by the body but proceeds outside the body. When I see a color, when I hear a sound, I experience the color and the sound not as a result of my body, but I am connected with the color, with the sound, as a self-conscious ego, outside my body. My body has the task to function in a way that can be compared with the action of a mirror. If, in my ordinary consciousness, I only have a mental connection with a color, I cannot perceive it because of the nature of this consciousness, just as I cannot see my own face when I look out into space. But if I look into a mirror, I perceive this face as part of a body. Unless I stand in front of the mirror, I am the body and experience myself as such. Standing in front of the mirror, I perceive my body as a reflection. It is like this also with our sense perceptions, although we must, of course, be aware of the insufficiency of the analogy. I live with a color outside my body; through the activity of my body, that is, my eye and my nervous system, this color is transformed for me into a conscious perception. The human body is not the producer of perceptions and of mental life in general, but a mirroring device of psychic and spiritual processes that take place outside the body.

[ 16 ] Such a view places the theory of knowledge on a promising basis. In a lecture called, The Psychological Foundations and Epistemological Position of Spiritual Science, delivered before the Philosophical Congress in Bologna on April 18, 1911, the author of this book gave the following account of a view that was then forming in his mind.

On the basis of epistemology one can reach a conception of the ego only if one does not think of it as being inside the bodily organization and as receiving impression “from outside.” One should conceive this “ego” as having its being within the general order (Gesetzmässigkeit) of the things themselves, and regard the organization of the body merely as a sort of mirror through which the organic processes of the body reflect back to the ego what this ego perceives outside the physical body as it lives and weaves within the true essence of the world.

[ 17 ] During sleep the mirror-like relation between body and soul is interrupted; the “ego” lives only in the sphere of the spirit. For the ordinary consciousness, however, mental life does not exist as long as the body does not reflect the experiences. Sleep, therefore, is an unconscious process. The exercises mentioned above and other similar ones establish a consciousness that differs from the ordinary consciousness. In this way, the faculty is developed not merely to have purely spiritual experiences, but to strengthen these experiences to such a degree that they become spiritually perceptible without the aid of the body, and that they become reflected within themselves. It is only in an experience of this kind that the soul can obtain true self-knowledge and become consciously aware of its own being. Real experiences that do not belong to the sense world, but to one in which the soul weaves and has its being, now rise in the manner in which memory brings back experiences of the past. It is quite natural that the followers of many modern philosophies will believe that the world that thus rises up belongs in the realms of error, illusion, hallucination, autosuggestion, etc. To this objection one can only answer that a serious spiritual endeavor, working in the indicated way, will discipline the mind to a point where it will clearly differentiate illusion from spiritual reality, just as a healthy mind can distinguish a product of fantasy from a concrete perception. It will be futile to seek theoretical proofs for this spiritual world, but such proofs also do not exist for the reality of the world of perceptions. In both cases, actual experience is the only true judge.

[ 18 ] What keeps many men from undertaking the step that, according to this view, can alone solve the riddles of philosophy, is the fear that they might be led thereby into a realm of unclear mysticism. Unless one has from the beginning an inclination toward unclear mysticism, one will, in following the described path, gain access to a world of spiritual experience that is as crystal clear as the structures of mathematical ideas. If one is, however, inclined to seek the spiritual in the “dark unknown,” in the “inexplicable,” one will get nowhere, either as an adherent or as an opponent of the views described here.

[ 19 ] One can easily understand why these views will be rejected by personalities who consider the methods used by natural science for obtaining knowledge of the sense world as the only true ones. But whoever overcomes such one-sidedness will be able to realize that the genuinely scientific way of thinking constitutes the real basis for the method that is here described. The ideas that have been shown in this book to be those of the modern scientific method, present the best subject matter for mental exercises in which the soul can immerse itself, and on which it can concentrate in order to free itself from its bondage to the body. Whoever uses these natural scientific ideas in the manner that has been outlined above, will find that the thoughts that first seem to be meant to depict only natural processes will really set the soul free from the body. Therefore, the spiritual science that is here referred to must be seen as a continuation of the scientific way of thinking provided it is inwardly experienced in the right way.


[ 20 ] The true nature of the human soul can be experienced directly if one seeks it in the characterized way. In the Greek era the development of the philosophical outlook led to the birth of thought. Later development led through the experience of thought to the experience of the self-conscious ego. Goethe strove for experiences of the self-conscious ego, which, although actively produced by the human soul, at the same time place this soul in the realm of a reality that is inaccessible to the senses. Goethe stands on this ground when he strives for an idea of the plant that cannot be perceived by the senses but that contains the supersensible nature of all plants, making it possible, with the aid of this idea, to invent new plants that would have their own life.

Hegel regarded the experience of thought as a “standing in the true essence of the world;” for him the world of thoughts became the inner essence of the world. An unbiased observation of philosophical development shows that thought experience was, to be sure, the element through which the self-conscious ego was to be placed on its own foundation. But it shows also that it is necessary to go beyond a life in mere thoughts in order to arrive at a form of inner experience that leads beyond the ordinary consciousness. For Hegel's thought experience still takes place within the field of this ordinary consciousness.

[ 21 ] In this way, a view of a reality is opened up for the soul that is inaccessible to the senses. What is experienced in the soul through the penetration into this reality, appears as the true entity of the soul. How is it related to the external world that is experienced by means of the body? The soul that has been thus freed from its body feels itself to be weaving in an element of soul and spirit. It knows that also in its ordinary life it is outside that body, which merely acts like a mirror in making its experiences perceptible. Through this experience the soul's spiritual experience is heightened to a point where the reality of a new element is revealed to the soul.

To Dilthey and Eucken the spiritual world is the sum total of the cultural experiences of humanity. If this world is seen as the only accessible spiritual world, one does not stand on a ground firm enough to be comparable to the method of natural science. For the conception of natural science, the world is so ordered that the physical human being in his individual existence appears as a unit toward which all other natural processes and beings point. The cultural world is what is created by this human being. That world, however, is not an individual entity of a higher nature than the individuality of the human being.

The spiritual science that the author of this book has in mind points to a form of experience that the soul can have independent from the body, and in this experience an individual entity is revealed. It emerges like a higher human nature for whom the physical man is like a tool. The being that feels itself as set free, through spiritual experience, from the physical body, is a spiritual human entity that is as much at home in a spiritual world as the physical body in the physical world. As the soul thus experiences its spiritual nature, it is also aware of the fact that it stands in a certain relation to the body. The body appears, on the one hand, as a cast of the spiritual entity; it can be compared to the shell of a snail that is like a counter-picture of the shape of the snail. On the other hand, the spirit-soul entity appears in the body like the sum total of the forces in the plant, which, after it has grown into leaf and blossom, contract into the seed in order to prepare a new plant. One cannot experience the inner spiritual man without knowing that he contains something that will develop into a new physical man. This new human being, while living within the physical organism, has collected forces through experience that could not unfold as long as they were encased in that organism. This body has, to be sure, enabled the soul to have experiences in connection with the external world that make the inner spiritual man different from what he was before he began life in the physical body. But this body is, as it were, too rigidly organized for being transformed by the inner spiritual man according to the pattern of the new experiences. Thus there remains hidden in the human shell a spiritual being that contains the disposition of a new man.

[ 22 ] Thoughts such as these can only be briefly indicated here. They point to a spiritual science that is essentially constructed after the model of natural science. In elaborating this spiritual science one will have to proceed more or less like the botanist when he observes a plant, the formation of its root, the growth of its stem and its leaves, and its development into blossom and fruit. In the fruit he discovers the seed of the new plant-life. As he follows the development of a plant he looks for its origin in the seed formed by the previous plant. The investigator of spiritual science will trace the process in which a human life, apart from its external manifestation, develops also an inner being. He will find that external experiences die off like the leaves and the flowers of a plant. Within the inner being, however, he will discover a spiritual kernel, which conceals within itself the potentiality of a new life. In the infant entering life through birth he will see the return of a soul that left the world previously through the gate of death. He will learn to observe that what is handed down by heredity to the individual man from his ancestors is merely the material that is worked upon by the spiritual man in order to bring into physical existence what has been prepared seedlike in a preceding life.

[ 23 ] Seen from the viewpoint of this world conception, many facts of psychology will appear in a new light. A great number of examples could be mentioned here; it will suffice to point out only one. One can observe how the human soul is transformed by experiences that represent, in a certain sense, repetitions of earlier experiences. If somebody has read an important book in his twentieth year and reads it again in his fortieth, he experiences it as if he were a different person. If he asks without bias for the reason for this fact, he will find that what he learned from his reading twenty years previous has continued to live in -him and has become a part of his nature. He has within him the forces that live in the book, and he finds them again when he rereads the book at the age of forty. The same holds true with our life experiences. They become part of man himself. They live in his “ego.” But it is also apparent that within the limits of one life this inner strengthening of the higher man must remain in the realm of his spirit and soul nature. Yet one can also find that this higher human being strives to become strong enough to find expression in his physical nature. The rigidity of the body prevents this from happening within a single life span. But in the central core of man there lives the potential predisposition that, together with the fruits of one life, will form a new human life in the same way that the seed of a new plant lives in the plant.

[ 24 ] Moreover, it must be realized that following the entry of the soul into an independent spirit world the results of this world are raised into consciousness in the same way that the past rises into memory. But these realities are seen as extending beyond the span of an individual life. The content of my present consciousness represents the results of my earlier physical experiences; so, too, a soul that has gone through the indicated exercises faces the whole of its physical experience and the particular configuration of its body as originating from the spirit-soul nature, whose existence preceded that of the body. This existence appears as a life in a purely spiritual world in which the soul lived before it could develop the germinal capacities of a preceding life into a new one. Only by closing one's mind to the obvious possibility that the faculties of the human soul are capable of development can one refuse to recognize the truthfulness of a person's testimony that shows that as a result of inner work one can really know of a spiritual world beyond the realm of ordinary consciousness. This knowledge leads to a spiritual apprehension of a world through which it becomes evident that the true being of the soul lies behind ordinary experiences. It also becomes clear that this soul being survives death just as the plant seed survives the decay of the plant. The insight is gained that the human soul goes through repeated lives on earth and that in between these earthly lives it leads a purely spiritual existence.

[ 25 ] This point of view brings reality to the assumption of a spiritual world. The human souls themselves carry into a later cultural epoch what they acquired in a former. One can readily observe how the inner dispositions of the soul develop if one refrains from arbitrarily ascribing this development merely to the laws of physical heredity. In the spiritual world of which Eucken and Dilthey speak the later phases of development always follow from the immediately preceding ones. Into this sequence of events are placed human souls who bring with them the results of their preceding lives in the form of their inner soul disposition. They must, however, acquire in a process of learning what developed in the earthly world of culture and civilization while they were in a purely spiritual state of existence.

[ 26 ] A historical account cannot do full justice to the thoughts exposed here. I would refer anyone who seeks more information to my writings on spiritual science. These writings attempted to give, in a general manner, the world conception that is outlined in the present book. Even so, I believe that it is possible to recognize from it that this world conception rests on a serious philosophical foundation. On this basis it strives to gain access to a world that opens up to sense-free observation acquired by inner work.

[ 27 ] One of the teachers of this world conception is the history of philosophy itself. It shows that the course of philosophical thought tends toward a conception that cannot be acquired in a state of ordinary consciousness. The accounts of many representative thinkers show how they attempt in various ways to comprehend the self-conscious ego with the help of the ordinary consciousness. A theoretical exposition of why the means of this ordinary consciousness must lead to unsatisfactory results does not belong to a historical account. But the historical facts show distinctly that the ordinary consciousness, however we may look at it, cannot solve the questions it nevertheless must raise. This final chapter was written to show why the ordinary consciousness and the usual scientific mind lack the means to solve such questions. This chapter was meant to describe what the characterized world conceptions were unconsciously striving for. From one certain point of view this last chapter no longer belongs to the history of philosophy, but from another point of view, its justification is quite clear. The message of this book is that a world conception based on spiritual science is virtually demanded by the development of modern philosophy as an answer to the questions it raises.

To become aware of this one must consider specific instances of this philosophical development. Franz Brentano in his Psychology points out how philosophy was deflected from the treatment of the deeper riddles of the soul (compare page of this volume). He writes, “Apparent as the necessity for a restriction of the field of investigation is in this direction, it is perhaps no more than only apparent.” David Hume was most emphatically opposed to the metaphysicists who maintained that they had found within themselves a carrier for all psychic conditions. He says:

For my part, when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. I can never catch myself at any time without a perception and never can observe anything but perceptions. When my perceptions are removed for any time, as by sound sleep, so long am I insensible of myself and may truly be said not to exist. (Treatise of Human Nature, Part IV, Sect. 6.)

Hume only knows the kind of psychological observation that would approach the soul without any inner effort. An observation of this kind simply cannot penetrate to the nature of the soul. Brentano takes up Hume's statement and says, “This same man, Hume, nevertheless, observes that all proofs for the immortality of the soul possess the same power of persuasion as the opposing traditional views.” But here we must add that only faith, and not knowledge, can support Hume's view that the soul contains nothing more than what he finds there. For how could any continuity be guaranteed for what Hume finds as the content of the soul? Brentano continues by saying:

Although it is obvious that a denial of a soul substance eliminates the possibility to speak of an immortality in the proper sense of the word, it is still not true that the question of immortality loses all meaning if a supporting substance for psychic activity is denied.

This becomes immediately evident if one considers that, with or without supporting substance, one cannot deny that our psychic life here on earth has a certain continuity. If one rejects the idea of a soul substance, one has the right to assume that this continuity does not depend on a supporting substance. The question as to whether our psychic life would continue after the destruction of our body will be no less meaningful for such a thinker than it is for others. It is really quite inconsistent if thinkers of this school reject the essential question of immortality as meaningless also in this important sense on the basis of the above-mentioned reason. It should then, however, be referred to as the immortality of life rather than that of the soul. (Brentano, Psychology from the Empirical Standpoint, Bk. I, Chap. 1.)

This opinion of Brentano's, however, is without support if the world conception outlined above is rejected. For where can we find grounds for the survival of psychic phenomena after the dissolution of the body if we want to restrict ourselves to the ordinary consciousness? This consciousness can only last as long as its reflector, the physical body, exists. What may survive the loss of the body cannot be designated as substance; it must be another form of consciousness. But this other consciousness can be discovered only through the inner activity that frees the soul from the body. This shows us that the soul can experience consciousness even without the mediation of the body. Through such activity and with the help of supersensible perception, the soul will experience the condition of the complete loss of the body. It finds that it had been the body, itself, that obscured that higher consciousness. While the soul is incarnated, the body has such a strong effect on the soul that this other consciousness cannot become active. This becomes a matter of direct experience when the soul exercises indicated in this chapter are successfully carried out. The soul must then consciously suppress the forces that originate in the body and extinguish the body-free consciousness. This extinction can no longer take place after the dissolution of the body. It is the other consciousness, therefore, that passes through successive lives and through the purely spiritual existence between death and birth. From this point of view, there is reference to a nebulous soul substance. In terms that are comparable to ideas of natural science, the soul is shown how it continues its existence because in one life the seed of the next is prepared, as the seed is prepared in the plant. The present life is shown as the reason for a future life, and the true essence of what continues when death dissolves the body is brought to light.

[ 28 ] Spiritual science as described here nowhere contradicts the methods of modern natural science. But science has to admit that with its methods one cannot gain insight into the realm of the spiritual. As soon as the existence of a consciousness other than the ordinary one is recognized, one will find that by it one is led to conceptions concerning the spiritual world that will give to it a cohesion similar to that that natural science gives to the physical world.

[ 29 ] It will be of importance to eliminate the impression that this spiritual science has borrowed its insights from any older form of religion. One is easily misled to this view because the conception of reincarnation, for instance, is a tenet of certain creeds. For the modern investigator of spiritual science, there can be no borrowing from such creeds. He finds that the devotion to the exercises described above will lead to a consciousness that enters the spiritual world. As a result of this consciousness he learns that the soul has its standing in the spiritual world in the way previously described.

A study of the history of philosophy, beginning with the awakening of thought in Greek civilization, indicates the way that leads to the conviction that the true being of the soul can be found below the surface of ordinary experience. Thinking has proved to be the educator of the soul by leading it to the point at which it is alone with itself. This experience of solitude strengthens the soul whereby it is able to delve not only into its own being but also to reach into the deeper realities of the world. The spiritual science described in this chapter does not attempt to lead behind the world of the senses by using the means of ordinary consciousness, such as reflection and theorizing. It recognizes that the spiritual world must remain concealed from that consciousness and that the soul must, through its own inner transformation, rise into the supersensible world before it can become conscious of it.

[ 30 ] In this way, the insight is also gained that the origin of moral impulses lies in the world that the soul perceives when it is free of the body. From there also the driving forces originate that do not stem from the physical nature of man but are meant to determine his actions independent from this nature.

[ 31 ] When one becomes acquainted with the fact that the “ego” with its spiritual world lives outside the body and that it, therefore, carries the experiences of the external world to the physical body, one will find one's way to a truly spiritual understanding of the riddle of human destiny. A man's inner life is deeply connected with his experiences of destiny. Just consider the state of a man at the age of thirty. The real content of his inner being would be entirely different if he had lived a different kind of life in his preceding years. His “ego” is inconceivable without the experiences of these years. Even if they have struck him serious blows of fate, he has become what he is through them. They belong to the forces that are active in his “ego.” They do not merely strike him from outside. As man lives in his soul and spirit with color that is perceptible only by means of its mirror-effect of the body, so he lives in union with his destiny. With color he is united in his soul life, but he can only perceive it when the body reflects it. Similarly, he becomes one with the effect of a stroke of destiny that results from a previous earth life, but he experiences this blow only inasmuch as the soul plunges unconsciously into events that spring from these causes. In his ordinary consciousness man does not know that his will is bound up with his destiny. In his newly acquired body-free consciousness he finds that he would be deprived of all initiative if that part of his soul that lives in the spiritual world had not willed its entire fate, down to the smallest details. We see that the riddles of human destiny cannot be solved merely by theorizing about them, but only by learning to understand how the soul grows together with its fate in an experience that proceeds beyond the ordinary consciousness. Thus, one will gradually realize that the causes for this or that stroke of destiny in the present life must be sought in a previous one. To the ordinary consciousness our fate does not appear in its true form. It takes its course as a result of previous earthly lives, which are hidden from ordinary consciousness. To realize one's deep connection with the events of former lives means at the same time that one becomes reconciled with one's destiny.

[ 32 ] For a fuller coverage of the philosophical riddles like these, the author must refer to his other works on spiritual science. We can only mention the more important results of this science but not the specific ways and means by which it can become convincing.

[ 33 ] Philosophy leads by its own paths to the insight that it must pass from a study of the world to an experience of it, because mere reflection cannot bring a satisfactory solution to all the riddles of life. This method of cognition is comparable to the seed of a plant. The seed can work in a twofold way when it becomes ripe. It can be used as human food or as seed for a new plant. If it is examined with respect to its usefulness, it must be looked at in a way different from the observation that follows the cycle of reproducing a new plant.

Similarly, man's spiritual experiences can choose either of two roads. On the one hand, it serves the contemplation of the external world. Examined from this point of view, one will be inclined to develop a world conception that asks above all things: How does our knowledge penetrate to the nature of things? What knowledge can we derive from a study of the nature of things? To ask these questions is like investigating the nutritional value of the seed. But it is also possible to focus attention on the experiences of the soul that are not diverted by outside impressions, but lead the soul from one level of being on to another. These experiences are seen as an implanted driving force in which one recognizes a higher man who uses this life to prepare for the next. One arrives at the insight that this is the fundamental impulse of all human soul experience and that knowledge is related to it as the use of the seed of the plant for food is comparable to the development of the grain into a new plant. If we fail to understand this fact, we shall live under the illusion that we could discover the nature of knowledge by merely observing the soul's experiences. This procedure is as erroneous as it is to make only a chemical analysis of the seed with respect to its food value and to pretend that this represents its real essence. Spiritual science, as it is meant here, tries to avoid this error by revealing the inner nature of the soul's experience and by showing that it can also serve the process of knowledge, although its true nature does not consist in this contemplative knowledge.

[ 34 ] The “body-free soul consciousness” here described must not be confused with those enhanced mental conditions that are not acquired by means of the characterized exercises but result from states of lower consciousness such as unclear clairvoyance, hypnotism, etc. In these conditions no body-free consciousness can be attained but only an abnormal connection between body and soul that differs from that of the ordinary life. Real spiritual science can be gained only when the soul finds, in the course of its own disciplined meditative work, the transition from the ordinary consciousness to one with which it awakens in and becomes directly aware of the spiritual world. This inner work consists in a heightening, not a lowering of the ordinary consciousness.

[ 35 ] Through such inner work the human soul can actually attain what philosophy aims for. The latter should not be underestimated because it has not attained its objective on the paths that are usually followed by it. Far more important than the philosophical results are the forces of the soul that can be developed in the course of philosophical work. These forces must eventually lead to the point where it becomes possible to recognize a “body-free soul experience.” Philosophers will then recognize that the “world riddles” must not merely be considered scientifically but need to be experienced by the human soul. But the soul must first attain to the condition in which such an experience is possible.

[ 36 ] This brings up an obvious question. Should ordinary knowledge and scientific knowledge deny its own nature and recognize as a world conception only what is offered from a realm lying outside its own domain? As it is, the experiences of the characterized consciousness are convincing at once also to this ordinary consciousness as long as the latter does not insist upon locking itself up within its own walls. The supersensible truths can be found only by a soul that enters into the supersensible. Once they are found, however, they can be fully understood by the ordinary consciousness. For they are in complete and necessary agreement with the knowledge that can be gained for the world of the senses.

[ 37 ] It cannot be denied that, in the course of the history of philosophy, viewpoints have repeatedly been advanced that are similar to those described in this final chapter. But in former ages these tendencies appeared only like byways of the philosophical inquiry. Its first task was to work its way through everything that could be regarded as a continuation of the awakening thought experience of the Greeks. It then could point the way toward supersensible consciousness on the strength of its own initiative and in awareness of what it can and what it cannot attain. In former times this consciousness was accepted, as it were, without philosophical justification. It was not demanded by philosophy itself. But modern philosophy demands it in response to what it has achieved already without the assistance of this consciousness. Without this help it has succeeded in leading the spiritual investigation into directions that will, if rightly developed, lead to the recognition of supersensible consciousness. That is why this final chapter did not start by describing the way in which the soul speaks of the supersensible when it stands within its realm. Quite to the contrary, an attempt was made to outline philosophically the tendencies resulting from the modern world conceptions, and it was shown how a pursuit of these innate tendencies leads the soul to the recognition of its own supersensible nature.

Skizzenhaft dargestellter Ausblick auf eine Anthroposophie

[ 1 ] Wer die Gestaltung der philosophischen Weltanschauungen bis in die Gegenwart hinein betrachtet, dem können sich in dem Suchen und Streben der Denkerpersönlichkeiten Unterströmungen offenbaren, die in ihnen gewissermaßen nicht zum bewußten Ausbruch kommen, sondern instinktiv leben. In diesen Strömungen sind Kräfte wirksam, welche den Ideen der Denker die Richtung, oft auch die Form geben, auf welche aber ihr forschender Geistesblick nicht unmittelbar sich richten will. Wie getrieben von verborgenen Gewalten, auf die sie sich nicht einlassen wollen, ja vor denen sie zurückschrecken: so erscheinen oft die Darlegungen dieser Denker. Es leben solche Gewalten in Diltheys, in Euckens, in Cohens Gedankenwelten. Was in diesen Gedankenwelten behauptet wird, ist der Ausdruck von Erkenntniskräften, von denen die Philosophen zwar unbewußt beherrscht sind, die aber in ihren Ideengebäuden keine bewußte Entfaltung finden.

[ 2 ] Sicherheit, Gewißheit des Erkennens wird in vielen Ideengebäuden gesucht. Die Richtung, welche befolgt wird, nimmt mehr oder weniger von Kants Vorstellungen den Ausgangspunkt. Bei der Gestaltung der Gedanken wirkt die naturwissenschaftliche Denkungsart bewußt oder unbewußt bestimmend. Daß aber in der «selbstbewußten Seele» die Quelle zu suchen ist, aus der die Erkenntnis zu schöpfen habe, um Aufschluß auch über die außerseelische Welt zu gewinnen, das ahnen viele. Und fast alle sind beherrscht von der Frage: Wie kommt die selbstbewußte Seele dazu, das, was sie in sich erlebt, als einer wahren Wirklichkeit Offenbarung anzusehen? Die alltägliche sinnliche Welt ist zur «Illusion» geworden, weil das selbstbewußte Ich im Laufe der philosophischen Entwickelung mit seinen Innenerlebnissen sich immer mehr in sich selbst isoliert gefunden hat. Es ist dazu gekommen, selbst in den Wahrnehmungen der Sinne nur Innenerlebnisse zu sehen, die in sich selbst keine Kraft verraten, durch die ihnen Dasein und Bestand in der Wirklichkeit verbürgt werden könnte. Man fühlt, wie viel davon abhängt, in dem selbstbewußten Ich einen Stützpunkt für die Erkenntnis zu finden. Aber man kommt in dem Forschen, welches durch dieses Gefühl angeregt wird, zu Anschauungen, welche nicht die Mittel hergeben, um mit dem Ich in eine Welt einzutauchen, welche das Dasein in befriedigender Art tragen kann.

[ 3 ] Wer nach Erklärung dieses Tatbestandes sucht, der kann sie finden in der Art, wie sich das durch die Philosophieentwickelung von der äußeren Weltwirklichkeit losgelöste Seelenwesen zu dieser Wirklichkeit gestellt hat. - Es fühlt sich von einer Welt umgeben, die sich ihm zunächst durch die Sinne offenbart. Die Seele ist aber auch auf ihre Selbsttätigkeit, auf ihr inneres schöpferisches Erheben aufmerksam geworden. Sie empfindet es wie eine unumstößliche Wahrheit, daß kein Licht, keine Farbe ohne das licht-, das farbenempfindende Auge geoffenbart werden kann. So fühlt sie das Schöpferische in der Tätigkeit schon des Auges. Wenn aber das Auge die Farbe selbstschöpferisch hervorbringt - so muß man im Sinne dieser Philosophie denken -, wo finde ich etwas, das in sich besteht, das sein Dasein nicht bloß durch meine eigene Schöpferkraft hat? Wenn nun schon die Offenbarungen der Sinne nur Äußerungen der Eigenkraft der Seele sind: muß es dann nicht im erhöhtem Maße das Denken sein, das Vorstellungen gewinnen will über eine wahre Wirklichkeit? Ist dieses Denken nicht dazu verurteilt, Vorstellungsbilder zu erzeugen, die im Charakter des Seelenlebens wurzeln, die aber nimmermehr etwas in sich bergen können, das für ein Vordringen zu den Quellen des Daseins irgendwelche Sicherheit gewährt? Solche Fragen brechen aus der neueren Philosophieentwickelung überall hervor.

[ 4 ] Solange man den Glauben hegt, in der Welt, welche sich durch die Sinne offenbart, sei ein Abgeschlossenes, ein auf sich Beruhendes gegeben, das man untersuchen müsse, um sein inneres Wesen zu erkennen, solange wird man aus der Wirrnis nicht herauskommen können, welche durch die angedeuteten Fragen sich ergibt. Die Menschenseele kann ihre Erkenntnisse nur in sich selbstschöpferisch erzeugen. Das ist eine Überzeugung, die mit Berechtigung sich herausgebildet hat aus den Voraussetzungen, welche in dem Kapitel dieses Buches «Die Welt als Illusion» und bei der Darstellung der Gedanken Hamerlings geschildert worden sind. Dann aber, wenn man zu dieser Überzeugung sich bekennt, kommt man über eine gewisse Klippe der Erkenntnis so lange nicht hinweg, als man sich vorstellt: die Welt der Sinne enthielte die wahren Grundlagen ihres Daseins in sich; und man müsse mit dem, was man in der Seele selbst erzeugt, irgendwie etwas abbilden, was außerhalb der Seele liegt.

[ 5 ] Nur eine Erkenntnis wird über diese Klippe hinwegführen können, welche ins geistige Auge faßt, daß alles, was die Sinne wahrnehmen, sich durch seine eigene Wesenheit nicht als eine fertige, in sich beschlossene Wirklichkeit darstellt, sondern als ein Unvollendetes, gewissermaßen als eine halbe Wirklichkeit. Sobald man voraussetzt, man habe in den Wahrnehmungen der Sinnenwelt eine volle Wirklichkeit vor sich, wird man nie dazu kommen, der Frage Antwort zu finden: Was haben die selbstschöpferischen Erzeugnisse der Seele zu dieser Wirklichkeit erkennend hinzuzubringen? Man wird bei der Kantschen Meinung stehen bleiben müssen: der Mensch muß seine Erkenntnisse als die Eigenprodukte seiner seelischen Organisation ansehen, nicht als etwas, was ihm als eine wahre Wirklichkeit sich offenbart. Liegt die Wirklichkeit außerhalb der Seele in ihrer Eigenart gestaltet, dann kann die Seele nicht das hervorbringen, was dieser Wirklichkeit entspricht, sondern nur etwas, das aus ihrer eigenen Organisation fließt.

[ 6 ] Anders wird alles, sobald erkannt wird, daß die Organisation der Menschenseele nicht mit dem, was sie in der Erkenntnis selbstschöpferisch erzeugt, sich von der Wirklichkeit entfernt, sondern daß sie in dem Leben, das sie vor allem Erkennen entfaltet, sich eine Welt vorzaubert, welche nicht die wirkliche ist. Die Menschenseele ist so in die Welt gestellt, daß sie wegen ihrer eigenen Wesenheit die Dinge anders macht, als sie in Wirklichkeit sind. In gewissem Sinne berechtigt ist, wenn Hamerling meint: «Gewisse Reizungen erzeugen den Geruch in unserem Riechorgan. Die Rose duftet also nicht, wenn sie niemand riecht ... Leuchtet dir, lieber Leser, das nicht ein und bäumt dein Verstand sich vor dieser Tatsache wie ein scheues Pferd, so lies keine Zeile weiter; laß dieses und alle anderen Bücher, die von philosophischen Dingen handeln, ungelesen; denn es fehlt dir die hierzu nötige Fähigkeit, eine Tatsache unbefangen aufzufassen und in Gedanken festzuhalten.» (Vgl. S. 525) Wie die sinnliche Welt erscheint, wenn sich der Mensch ihr unmittelbar gegenüberstellt, das hängt zweifellos von der Wesenheit seiner Seele ab. Folgt aber daraus nicht, daß er diese Erscheinung der Welt eben durch seine Seele bewirkt? Nun zeigt eine unbefangene Betrachtung, wie der unwirkliche Charakter der sinnlichen Außenwelt davon herrührt, daß der Mensch, indem er sich unmittelbar den Dingen gegenüberstellt, das in sich unterdrückt, was in Wahrheit zu ihnen gehört. Entfaltet er dann selbstschöpferisch sein Innenleben, läßt er aus den Tiefen seiner Seele aufsteigen, was in diesen Tiefen schlummert, dann fügt er zu dem, was er mit den Sinnen geschaut hat, ein weiteres hinzu, das das halb Wirkliche als ganz Wirkliches in der Erkenntnis gestaltet. Es liegt im Wesen der Seele, beim ersten Anblick der Dinge etwas auszulöschen, das zu ihrer Wirklichkeit gehört. Daher sind sie für die Sinne so, wie sie nicht in Wirklichkeit sind, sondern so, wie sie die Seele gestaltet. Aber ihr Schein (oder ihre bloße Erscheinung) beruht darauf, daß die Seele ihnen erst weggenommen hat, was zu ihnen gehört. Indem der Mensch nun nicht bei dem ersten Anschauen der Dinge verbleibt, fügt er im Erkennen das zu ihnen hinzu, was ihre volle Wirklichkeit erst offenbart. Nicht durch das Erkennen fügt die Seele etwas zu den Dingen hinzu, was ihnen gegenüber ein unwirkliches Element wäre, sondern vor dem Erkennen hat sie den Dingen genommen, was zu ihrer wahren Wirklichkeit gehört. Es wird die Aufgabe der Philosophie sein, einzusehen, daß die dem Menschen offenbare Welt eine «Illusion» ist, bevor er ihr erkennend gegenübertritt, daß aber der Erkenntnisweg die Richtung weist nach der vollen Wirklichkeit. Was der Mensch erkennend selbstschöpferisch erzeugt, erscheint nur deshalb als eine Innenoffenbarung der Seele, weil der Mensch sich, bevor er das Erkenntniserlebnis hat, dem verschließen muß, was aus dem Wesen der Dinge kommt. Er kann es an den Dingen noch nicht schauen, wenn er ihnen zunächst sich nur entgegenstellt. Im Erkennen schließt er sich selbsttätig das zuerst Verborgene auf. Hält nun der Mensch das, was er zuerst wahrgenommen hat, für eine Wirklichkeit, so wird ihm das erkennend Erzeugte so erscheinen, als ob er es zu dieser Wirklichkeit hinzugebracht hätte. Erkennt er, daß er das nur scheinbar von ihm selbst Erzeugte in den Dingen zu suchen hat, und daß er es vorerst nur von seinem Anblick der Dinge ferngehalten hat, dann wird er empfinden, wie das Erkennen ein Wirklichkeitsprozeß ist, durch den die Seele mit dem Weltensein fortschreitend zusammenwächst, durch den sie ihr inneres isoliertes Erleben zum Weltenerleben erweitert.

[ 7 ] In einer kleinen Schrift «Wahrheit und Wissenschaft», welche 1892 erschienen ist, hat der Verfasser dieses Buches einen schwachen Versuch gemacht, dasjenige philosophisch zu begründen, was eben andeutend dargestellt worden ist. Über Ausblicke spricht er da, welche sich die Philosophie der Gegenwart eröffnen muß, wenn sie über die Klippe hinwegkommen soll, die ihr durch ihre neuere Entwickelung naturgemäß sich ergeben hat. In dieser Schrift wird ein philosophischer Gesichtspunkt mit den Worten dargestellt: «Nicht die erste Gestalt, in der die Wirklichkeit an das Ich herantritt, ist deren wahre, sondern die letzte, die das Ich aus derselben macht. Jene erste Gestalt ist überhaupt ohne Bedeutung für die objektive Welt und hat eine solche nur als Unterlage für den Erkenntnisprozeß. Also nicht diejenige Gestalt der Welt, welche die Theorie derselben gibt, ist die subjektive, sondern vielmehr diejenige, welche dem Ich zuerst gegeben ist.» Eine weitere Ausführung über diesen Gesichtspunkt bildet des Verfassers späterer philosophischer Versuch «Philosophie der Freiheit» (erschienen 1894, 44.-48. Tausend, Stuttgart 1955). Er bemüht sich da, die philosophischen Grundlagen zu geben für eine Anschauung, die sich innerhalb des genannten Buches so angedeutet findet: «Nicht an den Gegenständen liegt es, daß sie uns zunächst ohne die entsprechenden Begriffe gegeben werden, sondern an unserer geistigen Organisation. Unsere totale Wesenheit funktioniert in der Weise, daß ihr bei jedem Dinge der Wirklichkeit von zwei Seiten her die Elemente zufließen, die für die Sache in Betracht kommen: von seiten des Wahrnehmens und des Denkens ... Es hat mit der Natur der Dinge nichts zu tun, wie ich organisiert bin, sie zu erfassen. Der Schnitt zwischen Wahrnehmen und Denken ist erst in dem Augenblicke vorhanden, wo ich, der Betrachtende, den Dingen gegenübertrete ...» Und auf S. 255 f.: «Die Wahrnehmung ist der Teil der Wirklichkeit, der objektiv, der Begriff derjenige, der subjektiv (durch Intuition) gegeben wird. Unsere geistige Organisation reißt die Wirklichkeit in diese beiden Faktoren auseinander. Der eine Faktor erscheint dem Wahrnehmen, der andere der Intuition. Erst der Zusammenhang der beiden, die gesetzmäßig sich in das Universum eingliedernde Wahrnehmung, ist volle Wirklichkeit. Betrachten wir die bloße Wahrnehmung für sich, so haben wir keine Wirklichkeit, sondern ein zusammenhangloses Chaos; betrachten wir die Gesetzmäßigeit der Wahrnehmungen für sich, dann haben wir es bloß mit abstrakten Begriffen zu tun. Nicht der abstrakte Begriff enthält die Wirklichkeit; wohl aber die denkende Beobachtung, die weder einseitig den Begriff, noch die Wahrnehmung für sich betrachtet, sondern den Zusammenhang beider.»

[ 8 ] Wer die hier angedeuteten Gesichtspunkte zu den seinigen machen kann, gewinnt die Möglichkeit, mit seinem Seelenleben in dem selbstbewußten Ich die fruchtbare Wirklichkeit verbunden zu denken. Das ist die Anschauung, zu welcher die philosophische Entwickelung seit dem griechischen Zeitalter hinstrebt und die in der Weltanschauung Goethes ihre ersten deutlich erkennbaren Spuren gezeigt hat. - Es wird erkannt, daß dieses selbstbewußte Ich nicht in sich isoliert und außerhalb der objektiven Welt sich erlebt, daß vielmehr sein Losgelöstsein von dieser Welt nur eine Erscheinung des Bewußtseins ist, die überwunden werden kann, überwunden dadurch, daß man einsieht, man habe als Mensch in einem gewissen Entwickelungszustande eine vorübergehende Gestalt des Ich dadurch zu zeigen, daß man die Kräfte, welche die Seele mit der Welt verbinden, aus dem Bewußtsein herausdrängt. Wirkten diese Kräfte unaufhörlich in dem Bewußtsein, dann käme man nicht zum kraftvollen, in sich ruhenden Selbstbewußtsein. Man könnte sich als selbstbewußtes Ich nicht erleben. Es hängt also die Entwickelung des Selbstbewußtseins geradezu davon ab, daß der Seele die Möglichkeit gegeben ist, die Welt ohne den Teil der Wirklichkeit wahrzunehmen, welchen das selbstbewußte Ich auf einer gewissen Stufe, auf derjenigen, die vor seiner Erkenntnis liegt, auslöscht. - Die Weltenkräfte dieses Wirklichkeitsgliedes arbeiten also am Seelenwesen so, daß sie sich in die Verborgenheit zurückziehen, um das selbstbewußte Ich kraftvoll aufleuchten zu lassen. Dieses muß demnach einsehen, daß es seine Selbsterkenntnis einer Tatsache verdankt, welche über die Welterkenntnis einen Schleier breitet. Dadurch ist notwendig bedingt, daß alles, was die Seele zum kraftvollen, energischen Erleben des Ich bringt, die tieferen Grundlagen unoffenbar macht, in welchen dieses Ich wurzelt. Nun ist aber alle Erkenntnis des gewöhnlichen Bewußtseins eine solche, welche das Kraftvolle des selbstbewußten Ich bewirkt. Der Mensch erfühlt sich als ein selbstbewußtes Ich dadurch, daß er mit seinen Sinnen eine Außenwelt wahrnimmt, daß er sich außerhalb dieser Außenwelt erlebt, und daß er zu dieser Außenwelt in einem solchen Verhältnisse steht, das auf einer gewissen Stufe der wissenschaftlichen Forschung die «Welt als Illusion» erscheinen läßt. Wenn alles dies nicht so wäre, träte das selbstbewußte Ich nicht in die Erscheinung. Strebt man also danach, im Erkennen nur nachzubilden, was schon vor dem Erkennen beobachtet wird, so erlangt man kein wahres Erleben in der vollen, sondern ein Abbild der «halben Wirklichkeit.»

[ 9 ] Gibt man zu, daß die Dinge so stehen, so kann man die Antwort auf die Rätselfragen der Philosophie nicht in den Erlebnissen der Seele suchen, die sich dem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein darbieten. Dieses Bewußtsein ist dazu berufen, das selbstbewußte Ich zu erkraften; es muß, zu diesem Ziele strebend, den Ausblick in den Zusammenhang des Ich mit der objektiven Welt verschleiern, kann also nicht zeigen, wie die Seele mit der wahren Welt zusammenhängt. - Damit ist der Grund angedeutet, warum ein Erkenntnisstreben, welches mit den Mitteln der naturwissenschaftlichen Vorstellungsart oder mit ähnlichem philosophisch vorwärts kommen will, stets an einem Punkte anlangen muß, wo ihm das Erstrebte im Erkennen zerfällt. Bei vielen Denkern der neueren Zeit mußte dieses Zerfallen von diesem Buche angedeutet werden. Denn im Grunde arbeitet alles wissenschaftliche Streben der neueren Zeit mit den wissenschaftlichen Denkermitteln, welche der Loslösung des selbstbewußten Ich von der wahren Wirklichkeit dienen. Und die Stärke und Größe der neueren Wissenschaft, namentlich der Naturwissenschaft, beruhen auf der rückhaltlosen Anwendung dieser Denkmittel.

[ 10 ] Einzelne Philosophen wie Dilthey, Eucken und andere lenken die philosophische Betrachtung auf die Selbstbeobachtung der Seele hin. Was sie aber betrachten, das sind diejenigen Erlebnisse der Seele, welche die Grundlage bilden des selbstbewußten Ich. Dadurch dringen sie nicht bis zu jenen Quellen der Welt, in denen die Erlebnisse der Seele aus der wahren Wirklichkeit hervorsprudeln. Diese Quellen können nicht dort liegen, wo die Seele mit dem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein zunächst sich selbst beobachtend gegenübersteht. Will die Seele zu diesen Quellen kommen, so muß sie aus diesem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein herausspringen. Sie muß etwas in sich erleben, was ihr dieses Bewußtsein nicht geben kann. Ein solches Erleben erscheint dem gewöhnlichen Erkennen zunächst als vollster Unsinn. Die Seele soll sich in einem Elemente wissend erleben, ohne ihr Bewußtsein in dieses Element mit hineinzutragen. Man soll das Bewußtsein überspringen und doch zugleich noch bewußt sein! - Und doch: man wird entweder immer weiter im philosophischen Streben zu Unmöglichem kommen, oder man wird sich den Ausblick darauf eröffnen müssen, daß der angedeutete «volle Unsinn» ein nur scheinbarer ist und daß gerade er den Weg weist, auf dem für die Rätselfragen der Philosophie Hilfe gesucht werden muß.

[ 11 ] Man wird sich gestehen müssen, daß der Weg «ins Innere der Seele» ein ganz anderer sein muß als derjenige, den manche Weltanschauungen der neueren Zeit wählen.

[ 12 ] Solange man die Seelenerlebnisse nimmt, wie sie sich dem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein darbieten, solange kommt man nicht in die Tiefen der Seele. Man bleibt bei dem stehen, was diese Tiefen hervortreiben. Euckens Weltanschauung ist in dieser Lage. - Man muß unter die Oberfläche der Seele hinunterstreben. Das kann man aber nicht mit den gewöhnlichen Mitteln des Seelenerlebens. Diese haben ihre Stärke gerade darin, daß sie die Seele in diesem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein erhalten.

[ 13 ] Mittel, tiefer in die Seele einzudringen, bieten sich dar, wenn man den Blick auf dasjenige richtet, was im gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein zwar mitarbeitet, aber in seiner Arbeit gar nicht in dieses Bewußtsein eintritt. Wenn der Mensch denkt, so ist sein Bewußtsein auf die Gedanken gerichtet. Er will durch die Gedanken etwas vorstellen; er will im gewöhnlichen Sinne richtig denken. Man kann aber auch auf anderes seine Aufmerksamkeit richten. Man kann die Tätigkeit des Denkens als solche in das Geistesauge fassen. Man kann zum Beispiel einen Gedanken in den Mittelpunkt des Bewußtseins rücken, der sich auf nichts Äußeres bezieht, der wie ein Sinnbild gedacht ist, bei dem man ganz unberücksichtigt läßt, daß er etwas Äußeres abbildet. Man kann nun in dem Festhalten eines solchen Gedankens verharren. Man kann sich ganz einleben nur in das innere Tun der Seele, während man so verharrt. Es kommt hierbei nicht darauf an, in Gedanken zu leben, sondern darauf, die Denktätigkeit zu erleben. Auf diese Weise reißt sich die Seele los von dem, was sie in ihrem gewöhnlichen Denken vollführt. Sie wird dann, wenn sie solche innere Übung genügend lange fortsetzt, nach einiger Zeit erkennen, wie sie in Erlebnisse hineingeraten ist, welche sie abtrennen von demjenigen Denken und Vorstellen, das an die leiblichen Organe gebunden ist. Ein gleiches kann man vollziehen mit dem Fühlen und Wollen der Seele, ja, auch mit dem Empfinden, dem Wahrnehmen der Außendinge. Man wird auf diesem Wege nur etwas erreichen, wenn man nicht zurückschreckt davor, sich zu gestehen, daß die Selbsterkenntnis der Seele nicht einfach angetreten werden kann, indem man nach dem Innern schaut, das stets vorhanden ist, sondern vielmehr nach demjenigen, das durch innere Seelenarbeit erst aufgedeckt werden muß. Durch eine Seelenarbeit, die durch Übung zu einem solchen Verharren in der inneren Tätigkeit des Denkens, Fühlens und Wollens gelangt, daß diese Erlebnisse gewissermaßen sich geistig in sich «verdichten». Sie offenbaren dann in dieser «Verdichtung» ihr inneres Wesen, das im gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein nicht wahrgenommen werden kann. Man entdeckt durch solche Seelenarbeit, daß für das Zustandekommen des gewöhnlichen Bewußtseins die Seelenkräfte sich so «verdünnen» müssen und daß sie in dieser Verdünnung unwahrnehmbar werden. Die hier gemeinte Seelenarbeit besteht in der unbegrenzten Steigerung von Seelenfähigkeiten, welche auch das gewöhnliche Bewußtsein kennt, die dieses aber in solcher Steigerung nicht anwendet. Es sind die Fähigkeiten der Aufmerksamkeit und der liebevollen Hingabe an das von der Seele Erlebte. Es müssen, um das Angedeutete zu erreichen, diese Fähigkeiten in einem solchen Grade gesteigert werden, daß sie wie völlig neue Seelenkräfte wirken.

[ 14 ] Indem man so vorgeht, ergreift man in der Seele ein wirkliches Erleben, dessen eigene Wesenheit sich als eine solche offenbart, welche von den Bedingungen der leiblichen Organe unabhängig ist. Das ist ein Geistesleben, das begrifflich nicht verwechselt werden darf mit dem, was Dilthey und Eucken die geistige Welt nennen. Denn diese geistige Welt wird von dem Menschen doch nur erlebt, indem er mit seinen Leibesorganen verbunden ist. Das hier gemeinte Geistesleben ist für die Seele, die an den Leib gebunden ist, nicht vorhanden.

[ 15 ] Und als eine erste Erfahrung dieses errungenen neuen Geisteslebens stellt sich die wahre Erkenntnis des gewöhnlichen Seelenlebens dar. In Wahrheit ist auch dieses nicht durch den Leib hervorgebracht, sondern es verläuft außerhalb des Leibes. Wenn ich eine Farbe sehe, wenn ich einen Ton höre, so erlebe ich die Farbe, den Ton nicht als ein Ergebnis des Leibes, sondern ich bin als selbstbewußtes Ich mit der Farbe, mit dem Ton außerhalb des Leibes verbunden. Der Leib hat die Aufgabe, so zu wirken, daß man ihn mit einem Spiegel vergleichen kann. Wenn ich mit einer Farbe im gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein nur seelisch verbunden bin, so kann ich wegen der Einrichtung dieses Bewußtseins nichts von der Farbe wahrnehmen. Wie ich auch mein Gesicht nicht sehen kann, wenn ich vor mich Hinblicke. Steht aber ein Spiegel vor mir, so nehme ich dies Gesicht als Körper wahr. Ohne vor dem Spiegel zu stehen, bin ich der Körper, ich erlebe mich als solchen. Vor dem Spiegel stehend nehme ich den Körper als Spiegelbild wahr. So ist es - das selbstverständlich Ungenügende eines Vergleichs muß beachtet werden - mit der Sinneswahrnehmung. Ich lebe mit der Farbe außer meinem Leibe, durch die Tätigkeit des Leibes (des Auges, des Nervensystems) wird mir die Farbe zur bewußten Wahrnehmung gemacht. Nicht ein Hervorbringer der Wahrnehmungen, des Seelischen überhaupt, ist der Menschenleib, sondern ein Spiegelungsapparat dessen, was außerhalb des Leibes seelisch-geistig sich abspielt.

[ 16 ] Durch solche Anschauung wird die Erkenntnislehre auf eine aussichtsvolle Grundlage gestellt. «Man wird ... zu einer ... Vorstellung über das ,Ich' erkenntnistheoretisch gelangen, wenn man es (das Ich) nicht innerhalb der Leibesorganisation befindlich vorstellt und die Eindrücke ihm,von außen‘ geben läßt, sondern wenn man dieses ,Ich' in die Gesetzmäßigkeit der Dinge selbst verlegt und in der Leibesorganisation nur etwas wie einen Spiegel sieht, welcher das außer dem Leibe liegende Weben des Ich im wahren Weltwesen diesem durch die organische Leibestätigkeit zurückspiegelt.» Mit solchen Worten versuchte der Verfasser dieses Buches die ihm vorschwebende Aussicht auf eine Erkenntnislehre zu charakterisieren in dem Vortrag, den er für den 1911 in Bologna gehaltenen philosophischen Kongreß ausgearbeitet hat: «Die psychologischen Grundlagen und die erkenntnistheoretische Stellung der Geisteswissenschaft.» (Siehe «Die Drei», Stuttgart 1948, 18. Jahrg. Heft 2/3.)

[ 17 ] Während des menschlichen Schlafes ist die spiegelnde Wechselwirkung zwischen dem Leibe und der Seele unterbrochen; das «Ich» lebt nur im Weben des Seelisch-Geistigen. Für das gewöhnliche Bewußtsein ist aber ein Erleben der Seele nicht vorhanden, wenn der Leib die Erlebnisse nicht spiegelt. Daher verläuft der Schlaf unbewußt. Durch die angedeuteten und ähnlichen Seelenübungen wird bewirkt, daß die Seele ein anderes als das gewöhnliche Bewußtsein entfaltet. Sie gelangt dadurch zu der Fähigkeit, rein seelisch-geistig nicht nur zu erleben, sondern auch das Erlebte in sich so zu erstarken, daß dieses sich gewissermaßen ohne die Hilfe des Leibes in sich selbst spiegelt und so zur geistigen Wahrnehmung kommt. Und in dem so Erlebten kann erst die Seele sich selbst wahrhaft erkennen, kann sie sich in ihrem Wesen bewußt erleben. - Wie die Erinnerung vergangene Tatsachen des physischen Erlebens aus den Tiefen der Seele heraufzaubert, so treten vor eine Seele, welche sich durch die charakterisierten Verrichtungen dazu bereitgemacht hat, aus deren inneren Tiefen wesenhafte Erlebnisse herauf, welche nicht der Welt des Sinnesseins angehören, doch aber einer Welt, in welcher die Seele ihr Grundwesen hat. - Es liegt nur zu nahe, daß der Gläubige mancher gegenwärtigen Vorstellungsart diese Welt, die hier zum Vorschein kommt, in das Gebiet der Erinnerungsirrtümer, der Illusionen, Halluzinationen, Autosuggestionen und dergleichen verweist. Man kann dem nur erwidern, daß ein ernstes Seelenstreben, das auf dem angedeuteten Wege arbeitet, in der inneren Geistesverfassung, welche es sich anerzieht, so sichere Mittel findet, Illusion von geistiger Wirklichkeit zu unterscheiden, wie man im gewöhnlichen Leben bei gesunder Seelenverfassung ein Phantasiegebilde von einer Wahrnehmung unterscheiden kann. Theoretische Beweise, daß die charakterisierte geistige Welt wirklich ist, wird man vergeblich suchen; doch gibt es solche auch nicht für die Wirklichkeit der Wahrnehmungswelt. Wie da zu urteilen ist, darüber entscheidet das Erleben selbst in dem einen und dem anderen Falle.

[ 18 ] Was viele zurückhält, den Schritt zu unternehmen, der nach dieser Darstellung allein für die philosophischen Rätselfragen aussichtsvoll ist, das ist, daß sie durch denselben in ein Gebiet nebelhafter Mystik zu verfallen glauben. Wer nicht von vornherein den Zug der Seele zu solch nebelhafter Mystik hat, der wird auf dem geschilderten Wege sich den Zugang zu einer Welt seelischen Erlebens eröffnen, welches in sich kristallklar wie das mathematische Ideengebäude ist. Wenn man allerdings den Hang dazu hat, das Geistige im «dunklen Unbekannten», in dem, «was sich nicht erklären läßt», zu suchen, dann wird man weder als Kenner noch als Gegner des geschilderten Weges auf demselben sich zurechtfinden können.

[ 19 ] Leicht verständlich ist auch, daß solche Persönlichkeiten, welche in der Vorstellungsart, deren sich die Naturwissenschaft zur Erkenntnis der Sinneswelt bedient, den einzigen wahren wissenschaftlichen Weg erkennen wollen, sich gegen das hier Angedeutete kräftig sträuben. Doch wird, wer solche Einseitigkeit absteift, erkennen können, daß eben in der echten naturwissenschaftlichen Gesinnung die Grundlage liegt für ein Aufnehmen des hier Geschilderten. Man hat an den Ideen, welche in diesem Buche als diejenigen der neueren naturwissenschaftlichen Vorstellungsart geschildert worden sind, die besten Übungsgedanken, welchen die Seele sich hingeben und auf denen sie verharren kann, um sich in ihrem inneren Erleben von dem Gebundensein an den Leib zu lösen. Wer diese naturwissenschaftlichen Ideen verwendet, um mit ihnen so zu verfahren, wie in diesen Ausführungen geschildert worden ist, der wird finden, daß Gedanken, die ursprünglich nur bestimmt scheinen, die Naturvorgänge abzubilden, bei der inneren Geistesübung die Seele wirklich loslösen vom Leibe, und daß daher die hier gemeinte Geisteswissenschaft eine Fortsetzung bilden muß der seelisch recht erlebten naturwissenschaftlichen Denkungsart.


[ 20 ] Man erlebt wissend das wahre Wesen der Menschenseele, wenn man es auf dem charakterisierten Wege sucht. Die Entwickelung der philosophischen Weltanschauungen hat im griechischen Zeitalter zur Geburt des Gedankens auf dem Felde dieser Weltanschauungen geführt. Der Fortschritt dieser Entwickelung ging später dahin, durch die Gedankenerlebnisse die philosophische Betrachtung auf das selbstbewußte Ich hinzuführen. Goethe strebte in dem selbstbewußten Ich nach solchen Erlebnissen, die, indem sie von der Menschenseele erarbeitet werden, zugleich diese Seele in den Bereich derjenigen Wirklichkeit stellen, welche den Sinnen unzugänglich ist. Wenn er nach einer solchen Idee der Pflanze strebt, die nicht mit Sinnen geschaut werden kann, die jedoch das übersinnliche Wesen aller Pflanzen so enthält, daß man, von ihr ausgehend, Pflanzen ersinnen kann, die lebensmöglich sind, so steht Goethe mit solcher Geistesart auf dem hier angezeigten Boden. - Hegel hat dann in dem Gedankenerleben der Menschenseele selbst das «Stehen in dem wahren Weltenwesen» gesehen; ihm wurde die Welt der wahren Gedanken zum inneren Wesen der Welt. - Ein unbefangenes Verfolgen der philosophischen Entwickelung zeigt, daß das Gedankenerleben zwar das Element war, durch welches das selbstbewußte Ich auf sich selbst gestellt werden sollte, daß aber über das Leben in Gedanken fortgeschritten werden muß zu einem solchen seelischen Erleben, das über das gewöhnliche Bewußtsein hinausführt. Denn auch Hegels Gedankenerleben verläuft noch in dem Bereiche dieses gewöhnlichen Bewußtseins.

[ 21 ] In der Seele eröffnet sich so der Ausblick auf eine Wirklichkeit, welche den Sinnen unzugänglich ist. Was in der Seele durch das Eindringen in diese Wirklichkeit erlebt wird, stellt sich dar als die tiefere Seelenwesenheit. Wie aber ist das Verhältnis dieser tieferen Seelenwesenheit zu der durch Vermittelung des Leibes erlebten Außenwelt? - Die vom Leibe auf die gekennzeichnete Art sich frei erlebende Seele erfühlt sich in einem seelisch-geistigen Weben. Sie ist mit dem Geistigen außerhalb des Leibes. Und sie weiß, daß sie auch im gewöhnlichen Leben außerhalb dieses Leibes ist, der ihr nur ihre seelisch-geistigen Erlebnisse wie ein Spiegelungsapparat zur Wahrnehmung bringt. Dadurch wird für sie das geistige Erheben so erhöht, daß ihr ein neues Element in Wirklichkeit sich offenbart. Betrachtungen über die geistige Welt nach der Art Diltheys oder Euckens finden als geistige Welt die Summe der Kulturerlebnisse der Menschheit. Mit dieser Welt als der einzig erfaßbaren Geisteswelt steht man nicht auf dem Boden, welcher der naturwissenschaftlichen Denkungsart entsprechend sich zeigt. Die Gesamtheit der Weltwesen ordnet sich für den naturwissenschaftlichen Blick so, daß der physische Mensch in seinem individuellen Dasein wie eine Zusammenfassung, eine Einheit erscheint, nach der alle anderen Naturvorgänge und Naturwesen hinweisen. Die Kulturwelt ist dasjenige, was durch diesen Menschen geschaffen wird. Allein eine individuelle Einheit höherer Art gegenüber der Individualität des Menschen ist sie nicht. Die hier gemeinte Geisteswissenschaft zeigt auf ein Erleben, das die Seele unabhängig vom Leibe haben kann. Und dieses Erleben offenbart sich als ein Individuelles. Es tritt auf wie ein höherer Mensch, der zu dem physischen Menschen wie zu seinem Werkzeuge steht. Was durch das geistige Erleben der Seele frei vom physischen Leibe sich erfühlt, ist ein geistig-seelisches einheitliches Menschenwesen, das so einer geistigen Welt angehört, wie der Leib der physischen. Erhebt die Seele dieses ihr geistiges Wesen, dann erkennt sie auch, daß dies in einem gewissen Verhältnisse zum Leibe steht. Der Leib erscheint einerseits wie eine Ablösung von dem seelisch-geistigen Wesen, etwa so, daß man den Vergleich wagen kann mit der Schneckenschale, die sich, die Schnecke umhüllend, wie ein Abbild aus ihr ergibt. Anderseits erscheint das Geistig-Seelische im Leibe wie die Summe von Kräften in der Pflanze, welche, nachdem die Pflanze sich entfaltet hat, nachdem sie ihre Entwickelung durch Blätter und Blüte vollendet hat, sich in dem Keime zusammendrängen, um die Anlage zu einer neuen Pflanze zu bilden. Man kann den geistig-seelischen Menschen nicht erleben, ohne zugleich durch das Erlebnis zu wissen, daß in diesem Menschen etwas enthalten ist, was sich zu einem neuen physischen Menschen gestalten will. Zu einem solchen, der durch sein Erleben in dem physischen Leibe sich Kräfte gesammelt hat, die nicht in diesem gegenwärtigen physischen Leibe zum Ausleben kommen können. Dieser gegenwärtige physische Leib hat wohl der Seele die Möglichkeit gegeben, Erlebnisse im Zusammenhange mit der Außenwelt zu haben, welche den geistig-seelischen Menschen anders machen als er war, da er das Leben in diesem physischen Leibe angetreten hat; doch ist dieser Leib gewissermaßen zu bestimmt gestaltet, als daß der geistig-seelische Mensch ihn nach den in ihm gemachten Erlebnissen umformen könnte. So steckt in dem Menschen ein geistig-seelisches Wesen, das die Anlage zu einem neuen Menschen enthält.

[ 22 ] Solche Gedanken können hier nur angedeutet werden. Was sie enthalten, eröffnet die Aussicht auf eine Geisteswissenschaft, die in ihrer inneren Wesenheit nach dem Muster der Naturwissenschaft gebaut ist. Der Bearbeiter einer solchen Geisteswissenschaft wird verfahren, wie etwa der Botaniker verfährt. Dieser verfolgt die Pflanze, wie sie Wurzel schlägt, Stamm und Blätter entfaltet, sich zur Blüte und Frucht entwickelt. In der Frucht wird er den Keim des neuen Pflanzenlebens gewahr. Und wenn er eine Pflanze entstehen sieht, so sucht er deren Ursprung in dem Keim, der von einer anderen Pflanze herrührt. Der Geisteswissenschafter wird verfolgen, wie ein Menschenleben, abgesehen von seiner Außenseite, auch ein inneres Wesen entfaltet; er wird die äußeren Erlebnisse gleich den Pflanzenblättern und Blüten hinsterbend finden; im Innern aber den geistig-seelischen Kern verfolgen, der die Anlage zu einem neuen Menschenleben birgt. In dem durch die Geburt ins Leben tretenden Menschen wird er dasjenige wieder in die Sinnesweht kommen sehen, was durch den Tod aus ihr hinausgegangen ist. Er wird beobachten lernen, wie dasjenige, was in der physischen Vererbungsströmung von den Ahnen dem Menschen übergeben wird, nur der Stoff ist, den der seelisch-geistige Mensch formend gestaltet, um das zum physischen Dasein zu bringen, was in einem vorhergegangenen Leben sich keimhaft vorgebildet hat.

[ 23 ] Man wird, von dem Gesichtspunkte dieser Weltanschauung aus, manches in der Seelenwissenschaft in einem neuen Lichte sehen. Vieles könnte hier erwähnt werden. Doch sei nur auf eines hingedeutet. Man beobachte, wie die Menschenseele durch Erlebnisse verwandelt wird, die in einem gewissen Sinne eine Wiederkehr früherer Erlebnisse darstellen. Wenn man ein bedeutungsvolles Buch in seinem zwanzigsten Jahre gelesen hat und es in seinem vierzigsten wieder liest, so erlebt man es wie ein anderer Mensch. Und wenn man unbefangen nach dem Grunde dieser Tatsache fragt, so ergibt sich, daß, was man durch das Buch im zwanzigsten Jahre aufgenommen hat, in einem fortlebt und ein Teil der eigenen Wesenheit geworden ist. Man hat in dem eigenen Geistig-Seelischen die Kraft, die in dem Buche liegt; und es liegt in diesem Buche im vierzigsten Jahre des Menschen diese in ihn eingegangene Kraft. So ist es auch mit Lebenserfahrungen. Diese werden zum Menschen selbst. Sie leben in seinem «Ich». Aber man sieht auch, daß während des einen Lebens dieses innere Kräftigen des höheren Menschen geistig-seelisch bleiben muß. Aber auch das andere wird man gewahr, daß dieser Mensch strebt, kräftig genug zu werden, um sich in Leiblichkeit auszuleben. Um das zu erreichen, ist die körperliche Bestimmtheit in dem einen Leben ein Hindernis. Im Innern des Menschen aber lebt anlagehaft der Keim, der ein neues Menschenleben mit dem Erworbenen bilden will, wie im Innern der Pflanze der Keim für eine neue Pflanze hebt.

[ 24 ] Dazu kommt, daß das Einleben der Seele in die vom Leibe unabhängige Geisteswelt ihr das wahrhaft Geistig-Seelische auf eine ähnliche Art ins Bewußtsein treten läßt, wie in der Erinnerung Vergangenes auftaucht. Doch zeigt sich dieses Geistig-Seelische als über das Einzelleben hinaufreichend. Wie, was ich jetzt in meinem Bewußtsein trage, in sich die Ergebnisse meines früheren physischen Erlebens in sich enthält, so offenbart sich der durch die angedeuteten Übungen gegangenen Seele das ganze physische Erleben, mit der besonderen Gestaltung des Leibes, als geformt von dem geistig-seelischen Wesen, das der Leibesbildung vorangegangen ist. Und dieses der Leibesbildung vorangegangene Leben kündigt sich an als ein solches in einer rein geistigen Welt, in welcher die Seele gelebt hat, bevor sie die Keimanlagen eines vorhergehenden physischen Lebens in einem neuen physischen Leben entwickeln konnte. Man muß sich verschließen vor der doch so einleuchtenden Möglichkeit, daß die Kräfte der menschlichen Seele entwickelungsfähig sind, wenn man sich sträubt, anzuerkennen, daß eine Seele Wahrheit redet, die ihre Erfahrung dahingehend ausspricht, daß sie durch innere Arbeit wirklich dazu gelangt ist, von einer geistigen Welt innerhalb eines von dem gewöhnlichen abweichenden Bewußtseins zu wissen. Und dieses Wissen führt zum geistigen Ergreifen einer Welt, aus welcher anschaulich wird, daß das wahre Wesen der Seele hinter dem gewöhnlichen Erleben liegt; daß sich dieses wahre Wesen geistig im Tode erhält, wie der Pflanzenkeim nach dem Hinsterben der Pflanze sich physisch erhält. Es führt zur Erkenntnis, daß die Menschenseele in wiederholten Erdenleben lebt, und daß zwischen diesen Erdenleben rein geistiges Dasein liegt.

[ 25 ] Von solchem Gesichtspunkt aus kommt Wirklichkeit in die Annahme einer geistigen Welt. Die Menschenseelen selbst sind es, welche das in einer Kulturepoche Errungene in die späteren hinübertragen. Die Seele erscheint im physischen Leben mit einer gewissen inneren Verfassung, deren Entfaltung man wahrnimmt, wenn man nur nicht so befangen ist, daß man in dieser Entfaltung nur das Ergebnis der physischen Vererbung sehen will. Was in dem von Eucken und Dilthey gemeinten Kulturleben als geistige Welt sich darstellt, ist so gestaltet, daß das Folgende stets an das unmittelbar Vorangehende sich schließt. Doch stehlen sich in diesen Fortgang hinein die Menschenseelen, welche das Ergebnis ihrer vorangehenden Leben mitbringen in Form der inneren Seelenstimmung, die aber, was in der physischen Kulturwelt sich entwickelt hat, während sie in einem rein geistigen Dasein waren, durch äußeres Lernen sich aneignen müssen.

[ 26 ] In einer geschichtlichen Darstellung kann nicht die volle Auseinandersetzung gegeben werden über das hier Angedeutete. Wer eine solche sucht, den erlaube ich mir zu verweisen auf meine Schriften über die hier gemeinte Geisteswissenschaft. Wenn diese auch anstreben, in einer möglichst allgemein zugänglichen Darstellungsart die Weltanschauung zu geben, deren Gesichtspunkte und Ziele hier skizziert sind, so glaube ich doch, daß es möglich ist, auch in dem Gewande dieser Darstellungsart zu erkennen, wie diese Weltanschauung auf einer ernst erstrebten philosophischen Grundlage ruht, und von dieser aus hineinstrebt in die Welt, welche die Menschenseele erschauen kann, wenn sie sich die leibfreie Beobachtung durch innere Arbeit erwirbt.

[ 27 ] Einer der Lehrmeister dieser Weltanschauung ist die Philosophiegeschichte selber. Deren Betrachtung zeigt, daß der Gang der philosophischen Arbeit hindrängt nach einer Anschauung, die nicht im gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein errungen werden kann. In den Darstellungen der repräsentativen Denkerpersönlichkeiten zeigt sich in mannigfaltigen Formen, wie die Durchforschung des selbstbewußten Ich, nach allen Seiten, mit den Mitteln des gewöhnlichen Bewußtseins versucht worden ist. Eine theoretische Auseinanderetzung, warum diese Mittel an unbefriedigenden Punkten ankommen müssen, gehört nicht in die geschichtliche Darstellung. Doch sprechen die geschichtlichen Tatsachen selbst deutlich aus, wie das gewöhnliche Bewußtsein, nach allen Seiten durchsucht, nicht dazu kommen kann, Fragen zu lösen, die es doch stellen muß. Und warum dem gewöhnlichen, auch dem gewohnten wissenschaftlichen Bewußtsein die Mittel für die Bearbeitung dieser Fragen fehlen müssen, das sollte dieses Schlußkapitel einerseits zeigen. Anderseits sollte es darlegen, wonach die charakterisierten Weltanschauungen unbewußt strebten. - Wenn von einem gewissen Gesichtspunkte aus dieses letzte Kapitel nicht mehr zur eigentlichen Philosophiegeschichte gehört, so wird es von einem anderen aus doch gerechtfertigt erscheinen, von einem solchen, dem die Ergebnisse dieses Buches einleuchtend sind. Denn diese Ergebnisse bestanden darin, daß die geisteswissenschaftliche Weltanschauung von der neueren Philosophieströmung wie gefordert erscheint, wie eine Antwort auf die von ihr hervorgetriebenen Fragen. Man muß diese Philosophieströmung an einzelnen charakteristischen Punkten betrachten, um dies gewahr zu werden. Franz Brentano spricht in seiner «Psychologie» davon, wie diese Strömung davon abgelenkt worden ist, die tieferen Rätsel des Seelischen zu behandeln (vgl. S. 521). Man kann in seinem Buche lesen: «Indessen, so scheinbar die Notwendigkeit der Beschränkung des Forschungsgebietes nach dieser Seite ist, so ist sie doch vielleicht nicht mehr als scheinbar. David Hume hat sich seinerzeit mit aller Entschiedenheit gegen die Metaphysiker erklärt, welche eine Substanz als Trägerin der psychischen Zustände in sich zu finden behaupten. ,Ich für mein Teil', sagt er, ,wenn ich recht tief in das, was ich mich selbst nenne, eingehe, stoße immer auf die eine oder die andere Wahrnehmung von Hitze oder Kälte, Licht oder Schatten, Liebe oder Haß, Schmerz oder Lust. Nie, so oft ich es auch versuche, kann ich meiner selbst habhaft werden ohne eine Vorstellung, und nie kann ich etwas entdecken außer der Vorstellung. Sind meine Vorstellungen für irgendwelche Zeit aufgehoben, wie bei gesundem Schlafe, so kann ich ebenso lange nichts von mir selbst verspüren, und man könnte in Wahrheit sagen, daß ich gar nicht bestehe.'» (Brentano, Psychologie, S. 20.) - Hume weiß nur von einer Seelenbeobachtung, welche ohne innere Seelenarbeit auf die Seele lossteuert. Eine solche Beobachtung kann eben nicht bis zu dem Wesenhaften der Seele dringen. Brentano knüpft nun an Humes Sätze an und spricht aus: «Nichtsdestoweniger bemerkt derselbe Hume, daß die sämtlichen Beweise für die Unsterblichkeit bei einer Anschauung wie der seinigen noch ganz dieselbe Kraft besitzen wie bei der entgegengesetzten und hergebrachten Annahme.» Dazu muß aber gesagt werden, daß nicht Erkenntnis, sondern nur ein Glaube festhalten könnte an den Worten Humes, wenn seine Meinung richtig wäre, daß nichts in der Seele zu finden ist, als was er angibt. Denn was könnte für einen Fortbestand bürgen dessen, was Hume als Inhalt der Seele findet? Brentano fährt fort: «Denn wenn auch der, welcher die Seelensubstanz leugnet, von einer Unsterblichkeit im eigentlichen Sinne selbstverständlich nicht reden kann, so ist es doch durchaus nicht richtig, daß die Unsterblichkeitsfrage durch die Leugnung eines substantiellen Trägers der psychischen Erscheinungen allen Sinn verliert. Dies wird sofort einleuchtend, wenn man bedenkt, daß, mit oder ohne Seelensubstanz, ein gewisser Fortbestand unseres psychischen Leben hier auf Erden jedenfalls nicht geleugnet werden kann. Verwirft einer die Seelensubstanz, so bleibt ihm nur die Annahme übrig, daß es zu einem Fortbestande wie diesem eines substantiellen Trägers nicht bedürfe. Und die Frage, ob unser psychisches Leben etwa auch nach der Zerstörung unserer leiblichen Erscheinung fortbestehen werde, wird darum für ihn ebensowenig wie für andere sinnlos sein. Es ist eigentlich eine bare Inkonsequenz, wenn Denker dieser Richtung die Frage nach der Unsterblichkeit auch in dieser ihrer wesentlichen Bedeutung, in welcher sie allerdings besser Unsterblichkeit des Lebens als Unsterblichkeit der Seele zu nennen ist, auf die angegebenen Gründe hin verwerfen.» (Brentano, Psychologie, S.21 f.) - Diese Meinung Brentanos läßt sich doch nicht stützen, wenn man nicht auf die hier skizzierte Weltanschauung eingehen will. Denn wo sollen sich Gründe zur Annahme finden, daß die seelischen Erscheinungen nach der Auflösung des Leibes fortbestehen, wenn man bei dem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein stehen bleiben will? Dieses Bewußtsein kann doch nur so lange dauern, als sein Spiegelungsapparat, der physische Leib, besteht. Was ohne diesen fortbestehen kann, darf nicht als Substanz bezeichnet werden; es muß ein anderes Bewußtsein sein. Dieses andere Bewußtsein kann aber nur entdeckt werden durch die innere Seelenarbeit, die sich leibfrei macht. Diese lernt erkennen, daß die Seele Bewußtsein auch ohne die leibliche Vermittelung haben kann. Durch diese Arbeit findet die Seele in übersinnlicher Anschauung den Zustand, in dem sie sich befindet, wenn sie den Leib abgelegt hat. Und sie findet, daß, während sie den Leib trägt, dieser selbst es ist, der jenes andere Bewußtsein verdunkelt. Mit der Einverleibung in den physischen Körper wirkt dieser so stark auf die Seele, daß sie das charakterisierte andere Bewußtsein im gewöhnlichen Leben nicht zur Entfaltung bringen kann. Das zeigt sich, wenn die in diesem Kapitel angedeuteten Seelenübungen mit Erfolg gemacht werden. Die Seele muß dann bewußt die Kräfte unterdrücken, die, vom Leibe ausgehend, das leibfreie Bewußtsein auslöschen. Dieses Auslöschen kann nach der Auflösung des Leibes nicht mehr stattfinden. Es ist also das geschilderte andere Bewußtsein dasjenige, das sich hindurcherhält durch die aufeinanderfolgenden Leben der Seele und durch die rein geistigen Leben zwischen Tod und Geburt. Und es wird von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus nicht von einer nebelhaften Seelensubstanz gesprochen, sondern mit einer den naturwissenschaftlichen Ideen ähnlichen Vorstellung gezeigt, wie die Seele deshalb fortbesteht, weil in einem Leben sich keimhaft das nächste vorbereitet, gleich dem Pflanzenkeim in der Pflanze. Es wird in dem gegenwärtigen Leben der Grund des künftigen gefunden. Es wird das Wahrhafte gezeigt, das sich fortsetzt, wenn der Tod den Leib auflöst.

[ 28 ] Man befindet sich mit der hier gemeinten Geisteswissenschaft nirgends im Widerspruche mit der neueren naturwissenschaftlichen Vorstellungsart. Man wird nur zugeben müssen, daß über das Gebiet des Geisteslebens mit dieser Vorstellungsart selbst keine Einsichten gewonnen werden können. Erkennt man die Tatsache eines anderen Bewußtseins, als es das gewöhnliche ist, so wird man finden, daß man durch dieses Bewußtsein zu Vorstellungen über die geistige Welt geführt wird, die für diese Welt einen Gesetzeszusammenhang ergeben, ganz ähnlich dem, der sich dem naturwissenschaftlichen Forschen für die physische Welt ergibt.

[ 29 ] Von Bedeutung wird sein, daß man von dieser Geisteswissenschaft den Glauben fernhält, als ob ihre Erkenntnisse irgendeiner älteren Religionsform entlehnt seien. Man wird zu diesem Glauben leicht verführt, weil zum Beispiel die Anschauung von den wiederholten Erdenleben ein Bestandstück gewisser Glaubensbekenntnisse ist. Für den modernen Geistesforscher kann es eine Entlehnung von solchen Glaubensbekenntnissen nicht geben. Er findet, daß die Erringung eines in die Geisteswelt reichenden Bewußtseins eine Tatsache für eine Seele werden kann, die sich gewissen - den geschilderten - Verrichtungen hingibt. Und er lernt als ein Ergebnis dieses Bewußtseins erkennen, daß die Seele in der charakterisierten Art ihren Bestand in der geistigen Welt hat. Für seine Betrachtung zeigt sich in der Philosophiegeschichte seit dem Aufleuchten des Gedankens im Griechentum der Weg, um philosophisch zu der Überzeugung zu kommen, daß man das wahre Seelenwesen findet, wenn man die gewöhnlichen Seelenerlebnisse als Oberfläche betrachtet, unter die hinabgestiegen werden muß. Der Gedanke hat sich als der Erzieher der Seele erwiesen. Er hat diese dahin gebracht, in dem selbstbewußten Ich ganz einsam zu sein. Aber indem er sie zu dieser Einsamkeit geführt hat, hat er ihre Kräfte gestählt, wodurch sie fähig werden kann, sich in sich so zu vertiefen, daß sie, in ihren Untergründen stehend, zugleich in dem tiefer Wirklichen der Welt steht. Denn vom Gesichtspunkte der hier charakterisierten geisteswissenschaftlichen Weltanschauung aus wird nicht der Versuch unternommen, mit den Mitteln des gewöhnlichen Bewußtseins durch bloßes Nachdenken (Hypothetisieren) hinter die Sinneswelt zu kommen. Es wird anerkannt, daß für dieses gewöhnliche Bewußtsein die übersinnliche Welt verschleiert sein muß, und daß die Seele sich durch ihre eigene innere Verwandlung in die übersinnliche Welt hineinstellen muß, wenn sie ein Bewußtsein von ihr erlangen will.

[ 30 ] Auf diesem Wege wird auch erkannt, daß der Ursprung der sittlichen Impulse in derjenigen Welt liegt, welche die Seele leibfrei anschaut. Aus dieser Welt ragen in das Seelenleben herein die Antriebe, welche nicht aus der leiblichen Natur des Menschen stammen, sondern unabhängig von dieser das Handeln des Menschen bestimmen sollen.

[ 31 ] Wenn man sich bekannt macht damit, daß das «Ich» mit seiner seelisch-geistigen Welt außerhalb des Leibes lebt, daß es also die Erlebnisse der Außenwelt selbst an diesen Leib heranbringt, so wird man auch den Weg finden zu einer wahrhaft geistgemäßen Auffassung des Schicksalsrätsels. Der Mensch ist in seinem seelischen Erleben durchaus verbunden mit dem, was er als Schicksal erlebt. Man betrachte doch den seelischen Bestand eines dreißigjährigen Menschen. Der wirkliche Inhalt seines inneren Seins wäre ein ganz anderer, wenn er in den vorhergehenden Jahren anderes erlebt hätte, als der Fall ist. Sein «Ich» ist nicht denkbar ohne diese Erlebnisse. Und wenn sie ihn auch als leidvolle Schicksalsschläge getroffen haben, er ist durch sie geworden, was er ist. Sie gehören zu den Kräften, welche in seinem «Ich» wirksam sind, nicht dieses von außen treffen. Wie der Mensch geistig-seelisch mit der Farbe lebt, und diese ihm nur durch die Spiegelung des Leibes zur Wahrnehmung gebracht wird, so lebt er als in einer Einheit mit seinem Schicksal. Mit der Farbe ist man seelisch verbunden; doch wahrnehmen kann man sie nur, wenn der Leib sie spiegelt; mit den Ursachen eines Schicksalsschlages ist der Mensch wesenhaft eins von vorangehenden Leben her, doch erlebt er ihn dadurch, daß sich seine Seele in ein neues Erdendasein geführt hat, in dem sie sich in Erlebnisse unbewußt stürzte, die diesen Ursachen entsprechen. Im gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein weiß er seinen Willen nicht mit diesem Schicksal verbunden; in dem errungenen leibfreien Bewußtsein kann er finden, daß er sich selbst nicht wollen könnte, wenn er mit demjenigen Teile seiner Seele, der wesenhaft in der Geisteswelt steht, nicht alle Einzelheiten seines Schicksals wollte. Auch das Schicksalsrätsel wird nicht so gelöst, daß man über dasselbe Hypothesen erdenkt, sondern dadurch, daß man verstehen lernt, wie man in einem über das gewöhnliche Bewußtsein hinausgehenden Erleben der Seele mit seinem Schicksal zusammenwächst. Dann erkennt man, daß in den Keimanlagen der dem gegenwärtigen vorangehenden Erdenleben auch die Ursachen liegen, warum man dieses oder jenes Schicksalsmäßige erlebt. Das Schicksal erscheint in der Art, wie es sich dem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein darstellt, nicht in seiner wahren Gestalt. Es verläuft als Folge der vorangehenden Erdenleben, deren Anblick dem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein nicht gegeben ist. Einsehen, daß man mit seinen Schicksalsschlägen durch die vorigen Leben verbunden ist, heißt, sich zugleich mit dem Schicksal versöhnen.

[ 32 ] Auch für solche Philosophierätsel, wie dieses, muß behufs ausführlicher Darstellung auf des Verfassers angeführte Werke über Geisteswissenschaft verwiesen werden. Hier können nur wichtigere Ergebnisse dieser Wissenschaft besprochen, nicht aber im einzelnen die Wege angedeutet werden, die dazu führen, von ihr überzeugt zu werden.

[ 33 ] Die Philosophie führt durch ihre eigenen Wege zu der Erkenntnis, daß sie von der Betrachtung zu einem Erleben schreiten müsse der Welt, die sie sucht. In der Betrachtung der Welt erlebt die Seele etwas, bei dem sie nicht stehenbleiben kann, wenn sie sich nicht unaufhörlich Rätsel sein will. Es ist mit dieser Betrachtung in der Tat so wie mit dem Samenkorn, das sich in der Pflanze entwickelt. Dasselbe kann in einer zweifachen Art seinen Weg finden, wenn es gereift ist. Es kann zur menschlichen Nahrung verwendet werden. Untersucht man es in bezug auf diese seine Verwendbarkeit, so kommen andere Gesichtspunkte in Betracht, als diejenigen sind, welche aus dem fortschreitenden Wege des Korns sich ergeben, den es macht, wenn es in den Boden versenkt, der Keim einer neuen Pflanze wird. Was der Mensch seelisch erlebt, hat in ähnlicher Art einen zweifachen Weg. Es tritt auf der einen Seite in den Dienst der Betrachtung einer äußeren Welt. Untersucht man das seelische Erleben von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus, so wird man die Weltanschauungen ausbilden, welche vor allen Dingen danach fragen: Wie dringt Erkenntnis in das Wesen der Dinge; was kann die Betrachtung der Dinge leisten? Solche Untersuchung ist zu vergleichen mit derjenigen nach dem Nahrungswert des Samenkorns. Doch kann man auch hinblicken auf das seelische Erleben, insofern dieses nicht nach außen abgelenkt wird, sondern in der Seele fortwirkend diese von Daseinsstufe zu Daseinsstufe führt. Dann erfaßt man dieses seelische Erleben in der ihm eingepflanzten treibenden Kraft. Man erkennt es als einen höheren Menschen im Menschen, der in dem einen Leben das andere vorbereitet. Man wird zu der Einsicht kommen, daß dieses der Grundimpuls des seelischen Erlebens ist. Und daß die Erkenntnis sich zu diesem Grundimpuls verhält wie die Verwendung des Samenkornes als Nahrung zu dem fortschreitenden Wege dieses Kornes, der es zum Keim einer neuen Pflanze macht. Wenn man dies nicht berücksichtigt, so lebt man in der Täuschung, daß man in dem Wesen des seelischen Erlebens das Wesen des Erkennens suchen kann. Man muß dadurch in einen Irrtum verfallen, dem ähnlich, der entstünde, wenn man das Samenkorn nur chemisch untersuchte auf seinen Nahrungswert hin und in dem Ergebnis dieser Untersuchung das innere Wesen des Samenkorns finden wollte. Die hier charakterisierte Geisteswissenschaft sucht diese Täuschung zu vermeiden, indem sie die selbsteigene innere Wesenheit des seelischen Erlebens offenbar machen will, das auf seinem Wege auch in den Dienst der Erkenntnis treten kann, ohne in dieser betrachtenden Erkenntnis seine ureigentliche Natur zu haben.

[ 34 ] Nicht verwechselt darf werden das hier geschilderte «leibfreie Seelenbewußtsein» mit denjenigen Seelenzuständen, welche nicht durch die charakterisierte innere Seelen-Eigen-Arbeit errungen werden, sondern aus herabgestimmtem Geistesleben (im traumhaften Hellsehen, in der Hypnose usw.) sich ergeben. Bei diesen Seelenzuständen hat man es nicht mit einem wirklichen Erleben der Seele in einem leibfreien Bewußtsein zu tun, sondern mit einer Verbindung des Leibes und der Seele, die von der des gewöhnlichen Lebens abweicht. Wirkliche Geisteswissenschaft kann nur errungen werden, wenn die Seele in eigener selbst geleisteter Innenarbeit den Übergang findet von dem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein zu einem solchen, mit dem sie in der geistigen Welt sich drinnen stehend klar erlebt. In einer Innenarbeit, die Steigerung, nicht Herabstimmung des gewohnten Seelenlebens ist.

[ 35 ] Durch solche Innenarbeit kann die Menschenseele erreichen, was von der Philosophie angestrebt wird. Die Bedeutung der letztern ist deshalb wahrlich nicht gering, weil sie auf dem Wege, den ihre Bearbeiter zumeist gehen, nicht zu dem kommen kann, was sie erreichen will. Denn wesentlicher als die philosophischen Ergebnisse selbst sind die Kräfte der Seele, welche sich in der philosophischen Arbeit erringen lassen. Und diese Kräfte müssen zuletzt doch dahin führen, wo der Philosophie die Anerkennung des «leibfreien Seelenlebens» möglich ist. Dort wird sie erkennen, daß die Welträtsel nicht bloß wissenschaftlich bedacht, sondern von der Menschenseele erlebt sein wollen, nachdem diese sich erst in den Zustand gebracht hat, in dem solches Erleben möglich ist.

[ 36 ] Naheliegend ist die Frage: Soll also das gewöhnliche, auch das vollwissenschaftliche Erkennen sich verleugnen und für eine Weltanschauung nur das gelten lassen, was ihr von einem Gebiete gereicht wird, das außerhalb des ihrigen liegt? Doch liegt die Sache so, daß die Erlebnisse des charakterisierten, von dem gewöhnlichen unterschiedenen Bewußtseins sogleich auch diesem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein einleuchtend sind, insofern dieses sich nur nicht selbst Hindernisse dadurch bereitet, daß es sich in seinem eigenen Bereiche einschließen will. Gefunden können die übersinnlichen Wahrheiten nur werden von der Seele, die sich in das Übersinnliche stellt. Sind sie da gefunden, so können sie von dem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein voll begriffen werden. Denn sie schließen sich an die Erkenntnisse ganz notwendig an, die für die sinnliche Welt gewonnen werden können.

[ 37 ] Es ist nicht zu leugnen, daß im Laufe der Weltanschauungs-entwickelung Gesichtspunkte wiederholt auftreten, die denen ähnlich sind, welche in diesem Schlußkapitel an die Betrachtung des Fortganges der philosophischen Bestrebungen geknüpft sind. Doch erscheinen sie in vorangehenden Zeitaltern wie Nebenwege des philosophischen Suchens. Dieses mußte erst alles das durchringen, was als Fortsetzung des Aufleuchtens der Gedankenerlebnisse im Griechenturn gelten kann, um aus seinen eigenen Impulsen heraus, aus dem Erfühlen dessen, was es selbst erreichen und nicht erreichen kann, auf den Weg des übersinnlichen Bewußtseins hinzuweisen. In vergangenen Zeiten war der Weg eines solchen Bewußtseins gewissermaßen ohne philosophische Rechtfertigung; er wurde nicht von der Philosophie selbst gefordert. Die Philosophie der Gegenwart fordert ihn aber durch das, was sie als Fortsetzung der vorangehenden philosophischen Entwickelung ohne ihn durchgemacht hat. Sie hat es ohne ihn dazu gebracht, das geistige Forschen in Richtungen zu denken, die, naturgemäß verfolgt, in die Anerkennung des übersinnlichen Bewußtseins einmünden. Deshalb wurde im Anfang dieses Schlußkapitels nicht gezeigt, wie die Seele über das Übersinnliche spricht, wenn sie sich ohne weitere Voraussetzung auf dessen Boden stellt, sondern es wurden die Richtungen philosophisch zu verfolgen versucht, die aus den neueren Weltanschauungen sich ergeben. Und es wurde angedeutet, wie das Verfolgen dieser Richtungen durch die in ihnen selbst lebende Seele diese zur Anerkennung der übersinnlichen Wesenheit des Seelischen führt.

Sketchy outlook on anthroposophy

[ 1 ] If you look at the shaping of philosophical worldviews up to the present day, you can see undercurrents in the searches and aspirations of thinkers which, to a certain extent, do not consciously break out in them but live instinctively. In these currents, forces are at work which give direction and often form to the thinkers' ideas, but to which their inquiring mental gaze does not want to be directed directly. The ideas of these thinkers often appear to be driven by hidden forces which they do not want to engage with, indeed which they shy away from. Such forces live in Dilthey's, Eucken's and Cohen's worlds of thought. What is asserted in these worlds of thought is the expression of forces of knowledge by which the philosophers are unconsciously dominated, but which find no conscious development in their buildings of ideas.

[ 2 ] Certainty, certainty of knowledge is sought in many buildings of ideas. The direction that is followed is more or less based on Kant's ideas. Consciously or unconsciously, the scientific way of thinking has a determining influence on the form of thought. However, many people suspect that the "self-conscious soul" is the source from which knowledge must be drawn in order to gain insight into the non-soul world. And almost all of them are dominated by the question: How does the self-conscious soul come to regard what it experiences within itself as a revelation of a true reality? The everyday sensual world has become an "illusion" because in the course of philosophical development the self-conscious ego with its inner experiences has found itself more and more isolated within itself. It has come to see even in the perceptions of the senses only inner experiences that betray in themselves no power by which their existence and existence in reality could be guaranteed. One feels how much depends on finding a point of support for knowledge in the self-conscious ego. But in the research that is stimulated by this feeling, one arrives at views that do not provide the means to immerse oneself with the ego in a world that can sustain existence in a satisfying way.

[ 3 ] Whoever seeks an explanation of this fact can find it in the way in which the soul being, detached from the external world reality through the development of philosophy, has placed itself in relation to this reality. - It feels surrounded by a world that reveals itself to it initially through the senses. But the soul has also become aware of its self-activity, of its inner creative upliftment. It feels it as an incontrovertible truth that no light, no color can be revealed without the eye that perceives light and color. Thus she senses the creativity in the activity of the eye. But if the eye brings forth color in a self-creative way - one must think in terms of this philosophy - where do I find something that exists in itself, that does not have its existence merely through my own creative power? Now if the revelations of the senses are only expressions of the soul's own power, must it not be to a greater extent thinking that wants to gain ideas about a true reality? Is this thinking not condemned to produce conceptual images that are rooted in the character of the life of the soul, but which can never contain anything that would grant any certainty for a penetration into the sources of existence? Such questions emerge everywhere from the more recent development of philosophy.

[ 4 ] As long as one cherishes the belief that in the world, which reveals itself through the senses, there is something self-contained, something based on itself, which one must examine in order to recognize its inner essence, one will not be able to escape from the confusion that results from the questions indicated. The human soul can only generate its knowledge self-creatively within itself. This is a conviction that has rightly emerged from the premises described in the chapter of this book entitled "The World as Illusion" and in the presentation of Hamerling's thoughts. But then, if one professes this conviction, one cannot get over a certain cliff of knowledge as long as one imagines: the world of the senses contains the true foundations of its existence in itself; and one must somehow depict something that lies outside the soul with what one produces in the soul itself.

[ 5 ] Only a realization will be able to lead over this cliff which grasps in the mind's eye that everything perceived by the senses does not present itself through its own essence as a finished, self-contained reality, but as something unfinished, as a half reality, so to speak. As soon as one assumes that one has a full reality before one in the perceptions of the sense world, one will never come to find an answer to the question: What do the self-creative products of the soul have to add to this reality in terms of cognition? We will have to remain with Kant's opinion: man must regard his cognitions as the products of his own mental organization, not as something that reveals itself to him as a true reality. If reality lies outside the soul in its own nature, then the soul cannot produce what corresponds to this reality, but only something that flows from its own organization.

[ 6 ] Everything becomes different as soon as it is recognized that the organization of the human soul does not distance itself from reality with that which it self-creates in cognition, but that in the life which it unfolds before all cognition, it conjures up a world for itself which is not the real one. The human soul is placed in the world in such a way that, because of its own nature, it makes things different from what they really are. In a certain sense, Hamerling is justified when he says: "Certain stimuli produce the smell in our olfactory organ. So the rose does not smell if nobody smells it ... If this does not make sense to you, dear reader, and if your mind rears up before this fact like a shy horse, do not read another line; leave this and all other books that deal with philosophical matters unread; for you lack the necessary ability to grasp a fact impartially and to hold it in your thoughts." (Cf. p. 525) How the sensual world appears when man confronts it directly undoubtedly depends on the nature of his soul. But does it not follow from this that he causes this appearance of the world precisely through his soul? Now an impartial observation shows how the unreal character of the sensuous external world derives from the fact that man, by directly confronting things, suppresses in himself that which in truth belongs to them. If he then unfolds his inner life in a self-creative way, if he lets rise from the depths of his soul what lies dormant in these depths, then he adds to what he has seen with the senses another thing that shapes the half-real as the fully real in cognition. It is in the nature of the soul to erase something that belongs to its reality at the first sight of things. Therefore, they are for the senses as they are not in reality, but as the soul shapes them. But their appearance (or their mere appearance) is based on the fact that the soul has first taken away what belongs to them. By not remaining with the first sight of things, man adds to them in cognition that which first reveals their full reality. It is not through cognition that the soul adds something to things that would be an unreal element in relation to them, but before cognition it has taken from things what belongs to their true reality. It will be the task of philosophy to recognize that the world revealed to man is an "illusion" before he cognizes it, but that the path of cognition points the way to full reality. What the human being self-creates through cognition only appears as an inner revelation of the soul because the human being, before he has the experience of cognition, must close himself off to what comes from the essence of things. He cannot yet see it in the things if he initially only confronts them. In recognizing, he automatically opens up what is initially hidden. If man now considers that which he first perceived to be a reality, then that which is created through cognition will appear to him as if he had added it to this reality. If he realizes that he has to look for that which he has only apparently produced himself in things, and that he has only kept it away from his view of things for the time being, then he will feel how cognition is a process of reality through which the soul progressively grows together with the being of the world, through which it expands its inner isolated experience into the experience of the world.

[ 7 ] In a small essay entitled "Truth and Science", which appeared in 1892, the author of this book made a feeble attempt to philosophically substantiate what has just been outlined. There he speaks of prospects which contemporary philosophy must open up if it is to get over the cliff which its recent development has naturally thrown up. In this work a philosophical point of view is presented with the words: "It is not the first form in which reality approaches the ego that is its true form, but the last form that the ego makes of it. That first form is of no significance at all for the objective world and has such a form only as a basis for the process of cognition. Thus it is not the form of the world that gives the theory of it that is the subjective, but rather the one that is first given to the ego." The author's later philosophical attempt "Philosophy of Freedom" (published in 1894, 44th-48th thousand, Stuttgart 1955) is a further elaboration on this point of view. There he endeavours to provide the philosophical foundations for a view that is hinted at in the aforementioned book: "It is not because of the objects that they are initially given to us without the corresponding concepts, but because of our mental organization. Our total being functions in such a way that for each thing of reality the elements that come into consideration for the thing flow to it from two sides: from the side of perceiving and thinking ... It has nothing to do with the nature of things how I am organized to grasp them. The intersection between perceiving and thinking is only present at the moment when I, the observer, confront things ..." And on p. 255 f.: "Perception is that part of reality that is given objectively, the concept that is given subjectively (through intuition). Our mental organization tears reality apart into these two factors. One factor appears to perception, the other to intuition. Only the connection between the two, the perception that integrates lawfully into the universe, is full reality. If we consider mere perception on its own, we have no reality, but an incoherent chaos; if we consider the lawfulness of perceptions on their own, then we are merely dealing with abstract concepts. Reality is not contained in the abstract concept, but in thinking observation, which considers neither the concept nor the perception in isolation, but the connection between the two."

[ 8 ] Whoever can make the points of view indicated here his own, gains the possibility of thinking the fruitful reality connected with his soul life in the self-conscious ego. This is the view towards which philosophical development has been striving since the Greek age and which showed its first clearly recognizable traces in Goethe's world view. - It is recognized that this self-conscious ego is not isolated in itself and experiences itself outside the objective world, but rather that its detachment from this world is only an appearance of consciousness that can be overcome, overcome by realizing that as a human being in a certain state of development one has to show a temporary form of the ego by forcing the forces that connect the soul with the world out of consciousness. If these forces were constantly at work in the consciousness, one would not arrive at a powerful self-consciousness at rest within oneself. One could not experience oneself as a self-conscious ego. The development of self-consciousness therefore depends on the soul being given the possibility of perceiving the world without that part of reality which the self-conscious ego erases at a certain stage, at that stage which lies before its cognition.—The world forces of this element of reality thus work on the soul being in such a way that they withdraw into concealment in order to allow the self-conscious ego to shine forth powerfully. The latter must therefore realize that it owes its self-knowledge to a fact which spreads a veil over the knowledge of the world. This necessarily means that everything that brings the soul to the powerful, energetic experience of the ego makes the deeper foundations in which this ego is rooted unrevealed. But all knowledge of ordinary consciousness is that which brings about the powerful self-conscious ego. Man perceives himself as a self-conscious ego by the fact that he perceives an external world with his senses, that he experiences himself outside this external world, and that he stands in such a relationship to this external world that at a certain stage of scientific research the "world appears as an illusion". If all this were not so, the self-conscious ego would not appear. So if one strives to reproduce in cognition only what is already observed before cognition, one does not attain a true experience in the full, but an image of "half reality."

[ 9 ] If one admits that things are like this, one cannot seek the answer to the riddles of philosophy in the experiences of the soul that present themselves to ordinary consciousness. This consciousness is called upon to strengthen the self-conscious ego; striving towards this goal, it must obscure the view into the connection of the ego with the objective world, and thus cannot show how the soul is connected with the true world. - This indicates the reason why a striving for knowledge that wants to make philosophical progress by means of the scientific mode of conception or something similar must always arrive at a point where what it strives for falls apart in the process of cognition. For many thinkers of recent times this disintegration must have been indicated by this book. For basically all scientific striving of the modern age works with the scientific means of thought, which serve to detach the self-conscious ego from true reality. And the strength and greatness of modern science, especially natural science, are based on the unreserved application of these means of thought.

[ 10 ] Individual philosophers such as Dilthey, Eucken and others direct philosophical contemplation towards the introspection of the soul. What they consider, however, are those experiences of the soul which form the basis of the self-conscious ego. Thus they do not penetrate to those sources of the world in which the experiences of the soul gush forth from true reality. These sources cannot lie where the soul, with its ordinary consciousness, first of all faces itself as an observer. If the soul wants to reach these sources, it must jump out of this ordinary consciousness. It must experience something within itself that this consciousness cannot give it. Such an experience initially appears to ordinary cognition as utter nonsense. The soul should experience itself knowing in an element without bringing its consciousness into this element. One should skip consciousness and yet still be conscious at the same time! - And yet: one will either continue to arrive at the impossible in philosophical striving, or one will have to open up the prospect that the "complete nonsense" indicated is only apparent and that it is precisely this that points the way on which help must be sought for the puzzling questions of philosophy.

[ 11 ] One will have to admit that the path "into the interior of the soul" must be quite different from the one chosen by some world views of recent times.

[ 12 ] As long as one takes the experiences of the soul as they present themselves to the ordinary consciousness, one does not reach the depths of the soul. One stops at what these depths bring forth. Eucken's world view is in this position. - One must strive down below the surface of the soul. But one cannot do this with the ordinary means of experiencing the soul. These have their strength precisely in the fact that they maintain the soul in this ordinary consciousness.

[ 13 ] Means of penetrating deeper into the soul present themselves when one directs one's gaze to that which indeed cooperates in the ordinary consciousness, but in its work does not enter this consciousness at all. When man thinks, his consciousness is directed towards thoughts. He wants to imagine something through his thoughts; he wants to think correctly in the ordinary sense. But one can also direct one's attention to something else. One can grasp the activity of thinking as such in the mind's eye. One can, for example, bring a thought into the center of consciousness that does not refer to anything external, that is thought like a symbol, in which one completely disregards the fact that it represents something external. One can now persist in holding such a thought. One can only become completely immersed in the inner activity of the soul while remaining in this way. The important thing here is not to live in thoughts, but to experience the activity of thinking. In this way the soul tears itself away from what it accomplishes in its ordinary thinking. If it continues this inner exercise long enough, after a while it will realize how it has become involved in experiences that separate it from the thinking and imagining that is bound to the bodily organs. The same can be done with the feeling and volition of the soul, yes, also with the sensation, the perception of external things. One will only achieve something in this way if one does not shrink from admitting to oneself that the soul's self-knowledge cannot simply be approached by looking at the inner being, which is always present, but rather at that which must first be uncovered through inner soul work. Through a work of the soul which, through practice, reaches such a persistence in the inner activity of thinking, feeling and willing that these experiences "condense" spiritually within themselves, so to speak. In this "condensation" they then reveal their inner essence, which cannot be perceived in ordinary consciousness. Through such soul work one discovers that for ordinary consciousness to come into being, the soul forces must "dilute" themselves in such a way that they become imperceptible in this dilution. The soul work meant here consists in the unlimited increase of soul abilities, which the ordinary consciousness also knows, but which it does not use in such an increase. These are the faculties of attention and loving devotion to what the soul experiences. In order to achieve what is indicated, these faculties must be increased to such an extent that they act as completely new soul powers.

[ 14 ] By proceeding in this way, one grasps a real experience in the soul, whose own essence reveals itself as such, which is independent of the conditions of the bodily organs. This is a spiritual life that must not be confused conceptually with what Dilthey and Eucken call the spiritual world. For this spiritual world is only experienced by man by being connected with his bodily organs. The spiritual life meant here does not exist for the soul, which is bound to the body.

[ 15 ] And as a first experience of this attained new spiritual life, the true realization of the ordinary life of the soul presents itself. In truth, this too is not produced by the body, but takes place outside the body. When I see a color, when I hear a sound, I do not experience the color, the sound as a result of the body, but as a self-conscious I am connected with the color, with the sound outside the body. The body has the task of working in such a way that it can be compared to a mirror. If I am connected with a color in ordinary consciousness only mentally, I cannot perceive anything of the color because of the arrangement of this consciousness. Just as I cannot see my face when I look in front of me. But if there is a mirror in front of me, I perceive this face as a body. Without standing in front of the mirror, I am the body, I experience myself as such. Standing in front of the mirror, I perceive the body as a reflection. It is the same - the obvious inadequacy of a comparison must be taken into account - with sensory perception. I live with the color outside my body, through the activity of the body (the eye, the nervous system) the color is made conscious perception for me. The human body is not a producer of perceptions, of the soul in general, but a mirroring apparatus of what takes place outside the body in a soul-spiritual way.

[ 16 ] This view places the theory of knowledge on a promising foundation. "One becomes ... to a ... conception of the 'I' in terms of epistemology if it (the I) is not imagined to be located within the organization of the body and the impressions are given to it 'from outside', but if this 'I' is transferred into the lawfulness of things themselves and the organization of the body is only seen as something like a mirror that reflects back to it the weaving of the I in the true world being outside the body through the organic activity of the body." With such words, the author of this book attempted to characterize the prospect of a theory of knowledge he had in mind in the lecture he prepared for the philosophical congress held in Bologna in 1911: "The Psychological Foundations and the Epistemological Position of Spiritual Science." (See "Die Drei", Stuttgart 1948, 18th year, issue 2/3.)

[ 17 ] During human sleep, the reflective interaction between the body and the soul is interrupted; the "I" lives only in the weaving of the soul-spiritual. For ordinary consciousness, however, there is no experience of the soul if the body does not reflect the experiences. Therefore sleep is unconscious. Through the soul exercises mentioned above and similar ones, the soul develops a consciousness other than the ordinary one. It thereby attains the ability not only to experience purely soul-spiritually, but also to strengthen the experience in itself in such a way that it is reflected in itself, so to speak, without the help of the body and thus comes to spiritual perception. And only in what is experienced in this way can the soul truly recognize itself, can it consciously experience itself in its essence. - Just as memory conjures up past facts of physical experience from the depths of the soul, so do essential experiences emerge from the inner depths of a soul that has prepared itself for them through the characterized activities, experiences that do not belong to the world of sense being, but nevertheless to a world in which the soul has its basic being. - It is only too natural that the believer in some present-day conceptions should relegate this world, which comes to light here, to the realm of misconceptions, illusions, hallucinations, autosuggestions and the like. To this one can only reply that a serious striving of the soul, working in the way indicated, finds in the inner state of mind which it acquires, as sure means of distinguishing illusion from spiritual reality as one can in ordinary life, with a healthy state of mind, distinguish a phantasy from a perception. Theoretical proofs that the characterized spiritual world is real will be sought in vain; but there are no such proofs for the reality of the perceptual world either. How this is to be judged is decided by the experience itself in the one and the other case.

[ 18 ] What holds many back from taking the step which, according to this description, is only promising for the philosophical riddle questions, is that they believe they are falling into a realm of nebulous mysticism. Whoever does not from the outset have the soul's inclination towards such nebulous mysticism will, by the path described, open up access to a world of spiritual experience which is in itself as crystal clear as the mathematical structure of ideas. However, if one has a tendency to seek the spiritual in the "dark unknown", in "that which cannot be explained", then neither a connoisseur nor an opponent of the path described will be able to find their way along it.

[ 19 ] It is also easy to understand that those personalities who want to recognize the only true scientific path in the mode of conception that natural science uses to gain knowledge of the sensory world, strongly resist what is indicated here. However, anyone who can cast aside such one-sidedness will be able to recognize that the basis for accepting what is described here lies precisely in the genuine scientific mindset. The ideas that have been described in this book as those of the newer scientific way of thinking are the best training thoughts to which the soul can devote itself and on which it can dwell in order to free itself in its inner experience from being bound to the body. Whoever uses these scientific ideas in order to proceed with them in the way described in these explanations will find that thoughts which originally only seem intended to depict the processes of nature really detach the soul from the body in the inner spiritual exercise, and that therefore the spiritual science meant here must form a continuation of the scientific way of thinking experienced correctly by the soul.


[ 20 ] One knowingly experiences the true nature of the human soul if one seeks it in the characterized way. The development of philosophical world views in the Greek age led to the birth of thought in the field of these world views. The progress of this development was later to lead philosophical contemplation to the self-conscious ego through the experience of thought. Goethe strove in the self-conscious ego for such experiences which, by being worked out by the human soul, at the same time place this soul in the realm of that reality which is inaccessible to the senses. If he strives for such an idea of the plant, which cannot be seen with the senses, but which contains the supersensible essence of all plants in such a way that, starting from it, one can conceive of plants that are possible to live, then Goethe is on the ground indicated here with such a way of thinking. - Hegel then saw in the thought experience of the human soul itself the "standing in the true world being"; for him the world of true thoughts became the inner being of the world. - An unbiased pursuit of philosophical development shows that the experience of thought was indeed the element through which the self-conscious ego was to be placed upon itself, but that progress must be made via life in thought to such a soul experience that leads beyond ordinary consciousness. For even Hegel's experience of thought still runs in the realm of this ordinary consciousness.

[ 21 ] In the soul, a view of a reality opens up that is inaccessible to the senses. What is experienced in the soul through the penetration into this reality presents itself as the deeper soul entity. But what is the relationship of this deeper soul entity to the external world experienced through the mediation of the body? - The soul, which experiences itself freely from the body in the marked way, feels itself in a soul-spiritual weaving. It is with the spiritual outside the body. And it knows that in ordinary life it is also outside this body, which only brings its soul-spiritual experiences to its perception like a mirroring apparatus. This raises her spiritual elevation to such an extent that a new element in reality reveals itself to her. Observations on the spiritual world in the manner of Dilthey or Eucken find the sum of mankind's cultural experiences as the spiritual world. With this world as the only comprehensible spiritual world, one does not stand on the ground that is revealed by the scientific way of thinking. The totality of world beings is ordered for the natural scientific view in such a way that the physical human being in his individual existence appears like a summary, a unity, to which all other natural processes and natural beings point. The world of culture is that which is created by this human being. But it is not an individual unity of a higher kind in relation to the individuality of man. The spiritual science referred to here points to an experience that the soul can have independently of the body. And this experience reveals itself as an individual. It appears as a higher human being who stands in relation to the physical human being as to his tools. What is felt through the spiritual experience of the soul free from the physical body is a spiritual-soul unified human being that belongs to a spiritual world just as the body belongs to the physical world. If the soul raises its spiritual being, then it also recognizes that this stands in a certain relationship to the body. On the one hand the body appears like a detachment from the soul-spiritual being, in such a way that one can venture the comparison with the snail shell, which, enveloping the snail, emerges from it like an image. On the other hand, the spiritual-mental in the body appears like the sum of forces in the plant, which, after the plant has unfolded, after it has completed its development through leaves and blossom, crowd together in the germ to form the plant for a new plant. One cannot experience the spiritual-soul man without at the same time knowing through experience that something is contained in this man which wants to form itself into a new physical man. A person who, through his experience in the physical body, has gathered forces that cannot be lived out in this present physical body. This present physical body has certainly given the soul the possibility to have experiences in connection with the outside world, which make the spiritual-soul man different than he was, since he started life in this physical body; but this body is in a way too definitely formed for the spiritual-soul man to be able to reshape it according to the experiences made in it. Thus there is a spiritual-soul being in the human being that contains the disposition for a new human being.

[ 22 ] Such thoughts can only be hinted at here. What they contain opens up the prospect of a spiritual science that is built in its inner essence according to the pattern of natural science. The practitioner of such a spiritual science will proceed as a botanist does. He follows the plant as it takes root, unfolds stem and leaves, develops into blossom and fruit. In the fruit he becomes aware of the germ of new plant life. And when he sees a plant develop, he looks for its origin in the germ that comes from another plant. The spiritual scientist will observe how a human life, apart from its outer side, also unfolds an inner being; he will find the outer experiences like the plant leaves and blossoms dying away; but inside he will observe the spiritual-soul core that harbors the disposition for a new human life. In the human being coming into life through birth, he will see that which has gone out of the senses through death coming back into them. He will learn to observe how that which is passed on to the human being by the ancestors in the physical stream of heredity is only the material which the soul-spiritual human being shapes in order to bring to physical existence that which was formed in germ form in a previous life.

[ 23 ] From the point of view of this world view, one will see many things in the science of the soul in a new light. Much could be mentioned here. But only one thing should be pointed out. Observe how the human soul is transformed by experiences which in a certain sense represent a return of earlier experiences. If you read a meaningful book in your twentieth year and read it again in your fortieth, you experience it as a different person. And if one asks impartially about the reason for this fact, it turns out that what one has absorbed through the book in one's twentieth year lives on in one and has become a part of one's own being. One has in one's own spiritual-soul the power that lies in the book; and in the fortieth year of man this power that has entered into him lies in this book. It is the same with life experiences. These become man himself. They live in his "I". But one also sees that during one life this inner strengthening of the higher man must remain spiritual-soul. But one also realizes the other, that this human being strives to become strong enough to live himself out in physicality. In order to achieve this, the physical determination in the one life is an obstacle. Within the human being, however, lives the germ that wants to form a new human life with the acquired, just as the germ for a new plant grows within the plant.

[ 24 ] In addition to this, the soul's living into the spiritual world independent of the body allows it to become aware of the truly spiritual-soul in a similar way to how the past emerges in memory. However, this spiritual-soul realm reveals itself as reaching beyond the individual life. Just as what I now carry in my consciousness contains within it the results of my earlier physical experience, so the whole physical experience, with the particular formation of the body, reveals itself to the soul that has gone through the exercises indicated, as formed by the spiritual-soul being that preceded the formation of the body. And this life that preceded the formation of the body announces itself as such in a purely spiritual world, in which the soul lived before it could develop the germinal plants of a previous physical life in a new physical life. One must close oneself off from the yet so plausible possibility that the powers of the human soul are capable of development if one is reluctant to acknowledge that a soul speaks truth which expresses its experience to the effect that through inner work it has really come to know of a spiritual world within a consciousness which differs from the ordinary one. And this knowledge leads to the spiritual grasping of a world from which it becomes clear that the true nature of the soul lies behind ordinary experience; that this true nature is preserved spiritually in death, just as the plant seed is preserved physically after the plant has died. It leads to the realization that the human soul lives in repeated earthly lives, and that between these earthly lives lies purely spiritual existence.

[ 25 ] From such a point of view, reality comes into the assumption of a spiritual world. It is the human souls themselves that carry over what has been achieved in one cultural epoch to the next. The soul appears in physical life with a certain inner constitution, the unfolding of which one perceives, if only one is not so biased as to see in this unfolding only the result of physical inheritance. What presents itself as the spiritual world in the cultural life meant by Eucken and Dilthey is shaped in such a way that what follows always follows on from what immediately precedes. However, human souls steal into this progress, bringing with them the result of their previous lives in the form of the inner mood of the soul, but which must appropriate through external learning what has developed in the physical cultural world while they were in a purely spiritual existence.

[ 26 ] The full discussion of what has been outlined here cannot be given in a historical account. If you are looking for such a discussion, I would refer you to my writings on the spiritual science referred to here. Even if these strive to present the world view whose points of view and aims are outlined here in a way that is as generally accessible as possible, I believe that it is also possible to recognize in the guise of this way of presentation how this world view rests on a seriously aspired philosophical foundation, and from this strives into the world that the human soul can behold when it acquires bodiless observation through inner work.

[ 27 ] One of the masters of this world view is the history of philosophy itself. An examination of it shows that the course of philosophical work pushes towards a view that cannot be attained in ordinary consciousness. In the portrayals of representative thinkers, we see in manifold forms how the exploration of the self-conscious ego has been attempted in all directions with the means of ordinary consciousness. A theoretical discussion of why these means must arrive at unsatisfactory points does not belong in the historical account. But the historical facts themselves clearly express how ordinary consciousness, searched on all sides, cannot arrive at the solution of questions which it must ask. And why the ordinary, even the usual scientific consciousness must lack the means to deal with these questions, that is what this final chapter should show on the one hand. On the other hand, it should show what the characterized world views unconsciously strive for. - If from a certain point of view this last chapter no longer belongs to the actual history of philosophy, it will nevertheless appear justified from another, from one to whom the results of this book are plausible. For these results consist in the fact that the world view of the humanities appears to be demanded by the newer current of philosophy, as an answer to the questions it raises. One must look at this philosophical current at individual characteristic points in order to become aware of this. In his "Psychology", Franz Brentano speaks of how this current has been distracted from dealing with the deeper riddles of the soul (cf. p. 521). One can read in his book: "However, as apparent as the necessity of limiting the field of research to this side is, it is perhaps no more than apparent. David Hume at the time declared himself resolutely against the metaphysicians who claim to find in themselves a substance as the bearer of mental states. 'For my part,' he says, 'when I enter deeply into what I call myself, I always meet with one or other perception of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hate, pain or pleasure. No matter how often I try, I can never become aware of myself without an idea, and I can never discover anything except the idea. If my ideas are suspended for any time, as in sound sleep, I can feel nothing of myself for just as long, and one could in truth say that I do not exist at all." (Brentano, Psychology, p. 20.) - Hume knows only of an observation of the soul which is directed towards the soul without any inner work of the soul. Such an observation cannot penetrate to the essence of the soul. Brentano now takes up Hume's propositions and says: "Nevertheless, the same Hume remarks that all the proofs of immortality have quite the same force in a view like his as in the opposite and traditional assumption." It must be said, however, that not knowledge, but only faith, could adhere to Hume's words, if his opinion were correct, that nothing is to be found in the soul but what he states. For what could vouch for the continuance of what Hume finds to be the content of the soul? Brentano continues: "For although he who denies the substance of the soul cannot, of course, speak of immortality in the proper sense, it is not at all true that the question of immortality loses all meaning through the denial of a substantial carrier of psychical phenomena. This becomes immediately obvious when one considers that, with or without soul substance, a certain continuation of our psychic life here on earth cannot be denied. If one rejects the soul-substance, then all that remains for him is the assumption that a substantial carrier is not necessary for a continued existence such as this. And the question of whether our psychic life will continue to exist after the destruction of our bodily appearance will therefore be just as pointless for him as for others. It is actually a bare inconsistency when thinkers of this school reject the question of immortality even in its essential meaning, in which, however, it is better to call it immortality of life than immortality of the soul, for the reasons given." (Brentano, Psychology, p.21 f.) - Brentano's opinion cannot be supported if one does not want to go into the world view outlined here. For where are the reasons to assume that the mental phenomena continue to exist after the dissolution of the body if one wants to remain with ordinary consciousness? This consciousness can only last as long as its mirroring apparatus, the physical body, exists. What can continue to exist without it cannot be called substance; it must be a different consciousness. But this other consciousness can only be discovered through the inner work of the soul, which makes itself free of the body. It learns to recognize that the soul can also have consciousness without bodily mediation. Through this work the soul finds in supersensible perception the state in which it finds itself when it has laid aside the body. And it finds that, while it carries the body, it is the body itself that obscures that other consciousness. With the incorporation into the physical body, the latter has such a strong effect on the soul that it cannot bring the characterized other consciousness to unfold in ordinary life. This becomes apparent when the soul exercises indicated in this chapter are successfully carried out. The soul must then consciously suppress the forces which, emanating from the body, extinguish the body-free consciousness. This extinguishing can no longer take place after the dissolution of the body. The other consciousness described is therefore the one that survives through the successive lives of the soul and through the purely spiritual lives between death and birth. And from this point of view we do not speak of a nebulous soul substance, but show with a conception similar to the ideas of natural science how the soul continues to exist because in one life the next is prepared in a germ-like manner, like the plant germ in the plant. The ground of the future life is found in the present life. The true is shown, which continues when death dissolves the body.

[ 28 ] The spiritual science meant here is nowhere in contradiction with the newer scientific way of thinking. One will only have to admit that no insights into the realm of spiritual life can be gained with this way of thinking itself. If one recognizes the fact of a consciousness other than the ordinary one, one will find that through this consciousness one is led to ideas about the spiritual world, which result in a law connection for this world, quite similar to that which results from scientific research for the physical world.

[ 29 ] It will be important to keep away from this spiritual science the belief that its findings are borrowed from some older form of religion. One is easily seduced into this belief because, for example, the view of repeated earthly lives is a component of certain creeds. For the modern spiritual researcher there can be no borrowing from such creeds. He finds that the attainment of a consciousness reaching into the spiritual world can become a fact for a soul that devotes itself to certain - the described - activities. And as a result of this consciousness he learns to recognize that the soul in the characterized way has its existence in the spiritual world. For his contemplation, the history of philosophy has shown the way, since the illumination of thought in Greek thought, to arrive philosophically at the conviction that one finds the true soul being when one regards the ordinary experiences of the soul as a surface beneath which one must descend. Thought has proved to be the educator of the soul. It has brought it to the point of being completely alone in the self-conscious ego. But by leading it to this solitude, it has steeled its powers, enabling it to become so absorbed in itself that, standing in its substratum, it stands at the same time in the deeper reality of the world. For from the point of view of the spiritual-scientific world-view characterized here, no attempt is made to get behind the sense world by means of ordinary consciousness through mere reflection (hypothetizing). It is recognized that for this ordinary consciousness the supersensible world must be veiled, and that the soul must place itself in the supersensible world through its own inner transformation if it wants to attain an awareness of it.

[ 30 ] In this way it is also recognized that the origin of moral impulses lies in that world which the soul beholds without a body. From this world the impulses protrude into the life of the soul, which do not originate from the bodily nature of man, but are intended to determine man's actions independently of it.

[ 31 ] If one becomes familiar with the fact that the "I" lives with its soul-spiritual world outside the body, that it therefore brings the experiences of the outside world itself to this body, then one will also find the way to a truly spiritual understanding of the riddle of destiny. In his spiritual experience man is definitely connected with what he experiences as fate. Just look at the soul of a thirty-year-old man. The real content of his inner being would be quite different if he had experienced something different in the preceding years than is the case. His "I" is inconceivable without these experiences. And even if they have hit him as painful blows of fate, he has become what he is through them. They belong to the forces that are effective in his "I", not affecting it from the outside. Just as man lives spiritually and emotionally with color, and this is only brought to his attention through the reflection of the body, so he lives as one with his destiny. One is spiritually connected with the color; but one can only perceive it when the body reflects it; man is essentially one with the causes of a stroke of fate from previous lives, but he experiences it through the fact that his soul has led itself into a new earthly existence, in which it unconsciously plunged into experiences that correspond to these causes. In ordinary consciousness he knows that his will is not connected with this fate; in the attained body-free consciousness he can find that he could not will himself if he did not want all the details of his fate with that part of his soul which is essentially in the spiritual world. Even the riddle of destiny is not solved by thinking up hypotheses about it, but by learning to understand how one grows together with one's destiny in an experience of the soul that goes beyond ordinary consciousness. Then one recognizes that in the germinal plants of the earth lives preceding the present one also lie the causes why one experiences this or that fate. Fate does not appear in its true form in the way it presents itself to the ordinary consciousness. It proceeds as a consequence of previous lives on earth, the sight of which is not given to the ordinary consciousness. To realize that one is connected to one's blows of fate through previous lives is to be reconciled with fate at the same time.

[ 32 ] For such philosophical puzzles as this, too, reference must be made to the author's works on spiritual science for a detailed account. Only the more important results of this science can be discussed here, but not in detail the paths that lead to being convinced of it.

[ 33 ] Philosophy leads through its own paths to the realization that it must proceed from contemplation to an experience of the world it seeks. In contemplating the world, the soul experiences something that it cannot stop at if it does not want to be an incessant riddle to itself. In fact, this contemplation is like the seed that develops in the plant. The same seed can find its way in two ways when it has matured. It can be used as human food. If one examines it with regard to its usability in this way, other points of view come into consideration than those which result from the progressive path the grain takes when it is sunk into the ground and becomes the germ of a new plant. What man experiences in his soul has a similar twofold path. On the one hand, it enters into the service of the observation of an external world. If one examines the experience of the soul from this point of view, one will develop world views that ask above all: How does knowledge penetrate into the essence of things; what can the contemplation of things achieve? Such an investigation can be compared to that of the nutritional value of the seed. But one can also look at the experience of the soul, in so far as this is not diverted outwards, but continues to work in the soul, leading it from one stage of existence to the next. Then one grasps this soul experience in the driving force implanted in it. One recognizes it as a higher man in man, who in one life prepares the other. One will come to the realization that this is the basic impulse of the spiritual experience. And that knowledge relates to this basic impulse as the use of the seed as food relates to the progressive path of this seed, which makes it the germ of a new plant. If one does not take this into account, one lives in the delusion that one can seek the essence of cognition in the essence of mental experience. One must thereby fall into an error similar to that which would arise if one only chemically examined the seed for its nutritional value and wanted to find the inner essence of the seed in the result of this examination. The spiritual science characterized here seeks to avoid this deception by wanting to reveal the self-emergent inner essence of mental experience, which can also enter into the service of knowledge on its way without having its very own nature in this observing knowledge.

[ 34 ] The "bodiless soul consciousness" described here must not be confused with those soul states which are not attained through the characterized inner work of the soul itself, but which result from a down-tuned spiritual life (in dreamlike clairvoyance, hypnosis, etc.). In these states of the soul we are not dealing with a real experience of the soul in a body-free consciousness, but with a connection between the body and the soul that differs from that of ordinary life. Real spiritual science can only be attained when the soul, in its own self-performed inner work, finds the transition from the ordinary consciousness to one with which it experiences itself clearly standing inside in the spiritual world, in an inner work that is an increase, not a decrease, of the usual life of the soul.

[ 35 ] Through such inner work, the human soul can achieve what philosophy strives for. The importance of the latter is truly not insignificant because it cannot achieve what it wants to achieve in the way that its practitioners usually do. For more important than the philosophical results themselves are the powers of the soul that can be attained in philosophical work. And these powers must ultimately lead to the point where philosophy is able to recognize the "bodiless life of the soul". There it will recognize that the world riddles are not merely scientifically considered, but want to be experienced by the human soul, after it has first brought itself into the state in which such an experience is possible.

[ 36 ] The question is obvious: Should ordinary, even fully scientific cognition deny itself and only accept for a world view what is handed to it from a field that lies outside its own? But the matter is such that the experiences of the characterized consciousness, which is different from the ordinary consciousness, are immediately also plausible to this ordinary consciousness, insofar as it does not cause obstacles for itself by wanting to enclose itself in its own realm. The supersensible truths can only be found by the soul that places itself in the supersensible. Once they have been found, they can be fully comprehended by the ordinary consciousness. For they necessarily follow on from the insights that can be gained for the sensory world.

[ 37 ] It cannot be denied that in the course of the development of the world-view, points of view repeatedly appear which are similar to those which in this concluding chapter are linked to the consideration of the progress of philosophical endeavors. But in previous ages they appear as side paths of philosophical searching. The latter first had to struggle through everything that can be regarded as a continuation of the illumination of thought-experiences in the Greek turn, in order to point to the path of supersensible consciousness out of its own impulses, out of the feeling of what it can and cannot achieve itself. In past times, the path of such consciousness was to a certain extent without philosophical justification; it was not demanded by philosophy itself. The philosophy of the present, however, demands it through what it has gone through as a continuation of the preceding philosophical development without it. It has brought it without him to think intellectual research in directions which, naturally pursued, lead to the recognition of supersensible consciousness. Therefore, in the beginning of this final chapter, it was not shown how the soul speaks about the supersensible when it places itself on its ground without any further presupposition, but an attempt was made to pursue the directions philosophically that result from the newer world views. And it was indicated how the pursuit of these directions through the soul living in them leads them to the recognition of the supersensible essence of the soul.