Wonders of the World, Ordeals of the Soul, Revelations of the Spirit. Lecture 6 of 10.
Rudolf Steiner, Munich, August 23, 1911:
We have devoted much attention in these lectures to a subject that arose out of the
dramatic performances which preceded them, but it is a subject which is
intimately bound up with the aim we have set before us in this year's Cycle. I
am referring to the world of the Greek gods and the form it took. Since our
actual subject is ‘Wonders of the World, Ordeals of the Soul and Revelations of
the Spirit’, why should we have spent so much time talking about the world of
the Greek gods? The reason is that such a study can provide — as well as much
else — the basis we need for a spiritual-scientific study of the world. I have
pointed out that the concept of nature and natural existence which is generally
accepted today was quite unknown to the ancient Greek. If we call to mind what
the thought and feeling of ancient Greece was really like, we find there no
chemical, physical, biological laws as we understand them today. What lit up in
the soul of the ancient Greek, what was enkindled in the spirit of this
marvellous Greek civilisation when the eye (clairvoyant or otherwise) was
directed upon the wonders of the world, presented itself to them as a kind of
knowledge, a kind of wisdom; but for us it is the marvellous structure of their
world of gods. Anyone who looks upon this world as having no inner coherence,
which is the usual attitude, knows nothing of what it is trying to express. This
world of the Greek gods, in its wisdom-filled structure, is actually the Greek
reply to the question ‘What is the response of the human soul to wonders of the
world?’ The Greek response to the riddle of the world was not a law of nature as
we understand it, but the shaping forth of some group or other of divine beings
or divine forces. Hence in these wonderful clues we have followed up in the last
few lectures, and which we sometimes found so astonishing, but which, pieced
together, give us the world of the Greek gods, we cannot help seeing the
equivalent of our own dry-as-dust, prosaic, abstract wisdom. And if we want to
make real progress in Spiritual Science we must acquire a feeling that it is
possible to think and feel in an entirely different manner from the modern way.
But when in the last lecture we were considering the figure of Dionysos, our attention was drawn to yet another thing. While the rest of the gods represent what was reflected in the soul of the Greek when he tried to understand the wonders of the world, we found that in the figure of Dionysos the Greek has concealed what we might call the inherent contradiction of life, and we shall get no further unless we give some thought to this aspect. Abstract logic, abstract intellectual thinking, is always trying to discover inconsistencies in higher world-conceptions, and then to say ‘This world-conception is full of inconsistencies; it cannot therefore be accepted as valid.’ The truth is, however, that life is full of contradictions — indeed nothing new, no development, would be possible unless contradiction lay in the very nature of things. For why is the world different today from what it was yesterday? Why does anything become, why does not everything remain as it was? It is because yesterday there was a self-contradictory element in the state of things, and today's new state has arisen through the realization of yesterday's contradiction and its overcoming. No one who sees things as they really are can say ‘Falsehood is detected by proving contradiction’ — for contradiction is inherent in reality. What would the human soul be like if it were free from contradictions? Whenever we look back at the course of our life we see that it has been activated by contradictions. If at some later date we are more perfect than we were earlier, it has come about because we have got rid of our earlier condition, because we have discovered our earlier state to be in contradiction to our own inner nature, and thus have called forth a reality of our own inner being in contradiction to what was. Contradiction is everywhere at the basis of all beings. Particularly when we study the entire man, the four-fold man, as we are accustomed to treat of him in the light of occultism, do we find this contradiction, a contradiction which addresses itself not only to our reason, to our philosophy, but to our hearts, to our whole soul-nature.
But when in the last lecture we were considering the figure of Dionysos, our attention was drawn to yet another thing. While the rest of the gods represent what was reflected in the soul of the Greek when he tried to understand the wonders of the world, we found that in the figure of Dionysos the Greek has concealed what we might call the inherent contradiction of life, and we shall get no further unless we give some thought to this aspect. Abstract logic, abstract intellectual thinking, is always trying to discover inconsistencies in higher world-conceptions, and then to say ‘This world-conception is full of inconsistencies; it cannot therefore be accepted as valid.’ The truth is, however, that life is full of contradictions — indeed nothing new, no development, would be possible unless contradiction lay in the very nature of things. For why is the world different today from what it was yesterday? Why does anything become, why does not everything remain as it was? It is because yesterday there was a self-contradictory element in the state of things, and today's new state has arisen through the realization of yesterday's contradiction and its overcoming. No one who sees things as they really are can say ‘Falsehood is detected by proving contradiction’ — for contradiction is inherent in reality. What would the human soul be like if it were free from contradictions? Whenever we look back at the course of our life we see that it has been activated by contradictions. If at some later date we are more perfect than we were earlier, it has come about because we have got rid of our earlier condition, because we have discovered our earlier state to be in contradiction to our own inner nature, and thus have called forth a reality of our own inner being in contradiction to what was. Contradiction is everywhere at the basis of all beings. Particularly when we study the entire man, the four-fold man, as we are accustomed to treat of him in the light of occultism, do we find this contradiction, a contradiction which addresses itself not only to our reason, to our philosophy, but to our hearts, to our whole soul-nature.
We must
constantly remind ourselves of the fundamental basis of our spiritual science:
that man as he stands before us consists of physical body, ether body, astral
body, and ego. Our being consists of these four members. Let us look at them as
they meet us to begin with on the physical plane, in the physical world. We will
for the present ignore the question as to how the human being appears to
clairvoyant sight, we will just ask how the four members of the human being
appear to physical eyes, for the physical world. Let us begin with the innermost
member of the human being, the ego, which as you know we regard as the youngest
— or better call it ‘the ego-bearer’. The outstanding characteristic of this
human ego occurs at once to anyone who studies the world with even a little
intelligence. However widely we search, we shall never find this ego by the
exercise of our physical senses, by exercising our faculties for knowledge of
the physical world. It is not visible to our eyes, nor in any way perceptible to
any faculty for acquiring knowledge of the outer world. Hence when we meet
another man, if we only try to study him physically, with purely physical
instruments, if we do not enlist the help of the clairvoyant eye, we can never
observe his ego. We go about among men, but with organs of perception for the
outer world we do not see their egos. If anyone thinks he can see egos he is
utterly deceiving himself. With physical faculties for acquiring knowledge of
external things we cannot observe the ego as such; we can only contemplate its
manifestation through the organs of the physical body. A man may be inwardly a
thoroughly untruthful person, but so long as he does not utter the lie so that
it passes over into the external world, we cannot see it in his ego, because
egos cannot be observed with external physical instruments. Thus, however far we
go in investigating with the forces of physical knowledge, we only encounter
this ego once. Although we know quite well that there are many egos upon the
Earth, only one of them is to be perceived, and that is our own. In the physical
world, or for physical instruments of knowledge, each man has only one
opportunity of perceiving the ego: that is his own ego. So that we may say that
the peculiarity of this youngest and highest member of the human being is that
its existence, its reality, is capable of being perceived in one example only,
in ourselves. The egos of all other men are hidden from us within their bodily
sheaths.
From this ego,
as the innermost, as the youngest, but also the highest member of the human
being, let us now turn to the outermost member, to the physical body. As you
know from things I have written or said on various occasions in recent years,
the physical body can only be known in its true inner being to clairvoyant
consciousness. To ordinary consciousness, to the physically based powers of
physical knowledge, the physical body manifests itself only as maya or illusion.
When we meet a man, what we see as his physical body is maya, illusion. But
there are as many instances of this illusion of a physical body as there are men
to be met with on Earth. And in this respect — as maya — our own body is just
like that of other men. Thus there is a great difference between the perception
of our own ego, of which only one example is given, and the perception of human
physical bodies, of which we have as many examples as the people we know on
Earth. We only learn to know the ego when we direct our physical faculty of
knowledge upon ourselves. We have to look into ourselves with the power of
knowledge which we have acquired upon the physical plane if we wish to learn to
know our ego.
I should perhaps
add, because there is so much unclear thinking, that what I mean by the ego
which we perceive with our physical powers of knowledge belongs entirely to the
physical world. It would be idle nonsense to say that what a man's normal
faculties find within him as his ego ever belongs to any other world than the
physical. If anyone were to consider the ego, observed not with clairvoyant but
with normal faculties, as belonging to any other world than that of the physical
plane, he would be making a mistake. In the higher worlds things look quite
different; the ego too for clairvoyant consciousness is something very different
from what man finds within him in normal consciousness. We must not think of the
ego of which ordinary psychology and ordinary science speak as belonging to
anything but the physical plane; only we are looking at it from within, and
because we stand within it, as it were, because we do not confront it from the
outside, we are able to say: ‘Admittedly we learn to know this ego upon the
physical plane only, but we do at least learn to know it in its own inner being,
by direct knowledge, whereas what we know of the physical body, of which we see
so many specimens in the world, is only maya.’ For as soon as the faculty
of clairvoyance is turned upon the physical body it dissolves like a cloud,
vanishes away, reveals itself as maya. And if we wish to get to know the
physical body in its true form we have to rise, not just to the astral plane but
to the highest region of Spirit-land, to Devachan; thus a clairvoyance of a
very high order is needed if we wish to learn to know the physical body in its
true form. Here below, in the physical world, the physical body has only a quite
illusionary stamp, and it is this counterfeit image that we see when we look at
this physical body from outside. Thus these two members of the human organism,
the highest and the lowest, show a very remarkable contrast. Here in the
physical world we see the human physical organism as maya — that is to
say, it is not at all in accordance with our inmost being; but the ego we see
here in the physical world is in its physical manifestation quite in keeping
with our inmost being. Please take note of that — it is an extremely important
fact. Let me put it in another way, half symbolically, and yet with all the
seriousness which the reality demands. Half symbolically, yes — but this
pictorial approach has a fullness about it which comes nearer to expressing the
truth than any abstract concepts.
Half
symbolically then, but also half seriously, I ask how we have to think of Adam
and Eve in Paradise before the Fall. We know that according to the Bible they
were unable to see each other's outer physical bodies before the Fall, and that
when they did begin to see them they were ashamed. That is the expression of a
most profound mystery. The Old Testament tells why Adam and Eve were ashamed of
their bodies after the Fall. It indicates that before the Fall the bodies they
had were more or less spiritual bodies, bodies only accessible to clairvoyant
consciousness, bodies of quite different appearance from physical bodies, bodies
which expressed the ego in its true form. We see that even the Bible recognizes
that quite a different bodily form, one only perceptible to clairvoyant vision,
was really fitted to the deepest being of man, and that the external physical
body we have today actually does not measure up at all to the inner being of
man. What then did Adam and Eve feel when their relation to each other was no
longer one in which they did not see their physical bodies, but on the contrary,
one in which they did see them? They felt that they had fallen into
matter, that, out of a world to which they had formerly belonged, denser matter
than had been theirs formerly had been instilled into them. They felt that man
with his physical body had been transplanted into a world to which, if the true
nature of his ego is taken into account, he does not belong. No more striking
expression could be found to mark how little the outer expression of his being,
the sensible reality, really measures up to the divine ego than this being
overcome by shame.
But we can look
at the matter from another aspect, which throws quite a different light upon it.
If man had not descended into his physical body, had not taken into himself the
denser matter, he would not have been able to acquire his ego-consciousness, or
in terms of the Greek mind, he would not have been able to participate in the
Dionysos forces. That also was felt by the Greeks. They felt that the ego of man
as it lives on the physical plane has within it not only those forces of a
higher spiritual, supersensible world which it had had before the Fall, and
which stream into it out of the spiritual worlds above, but that it is also
dependent upon forces which come from quite another side, from the opposite
direction. We know that before man had acquired his present ego-consciousness it
was normal for him to have a clairvoyant consciousness. But this clairvoyant
consciousness was a pictorial one, a dreamlike one, it was not a consciousness
lit up by any real intellectual light; man only acquired that later. This old
clairvoyant consciousness had to be lost to man in order that a new
ego-consciousness could arise. To this end the old form of the ego, the old
Dionysos Zagreus, had to be destroyed.
We had before us
yesterday the impressive picture of how this came about—of how in the language
of Greek mythology the elder Dionysos was dismembered by the Titans, and emerged
again later as the younger Dionysos, that is, as our present ego-consciousness,
the consciousness which has come about in human evolution as the achievement of
time. But in order to bring about the birth of the younger Dionysos the human
mother, Semele, has to play her part. The figure of Semele furnishes another
example of the unerring wisdom of Greek feeling for the true wonders of the
world.
A necessary
condition for the coming into existence of this younger human ego was that the
old clairvoyant consciousness had to die out, had to sink below the horizon of
consciousness. Anyone who knew that—and those who built up Greek mythology did
know it — said to himself: ‘Once upon a time the human soul was endowed with a
clairvoyant consciousness which looked up into a world full of spiritual beings
and spiritual deeds, into a world in which the human being was still a
fellow-citizen. But in course of time man has withdrawn from this spiritual
world, and has become a quite different being, a being permeated by an ego.’
What would happen to a man of today if, without his having undergone any
preparation, any kind of esoteric training, suddenly, in a moment, there were to
stand before him, instead of the physical world as it appears to physical eyes
and physical ears, the world that was there for the old clairvoyant
consciousness? Let us imagine that, by some miracle or other, instead of the
world which displays itself to him in the star-strewn heavens, in the rising and
the setting of the Sun, in mountain and cloud, in minerals, plants, and animals,
suddenly the world of old Atlantis were to stand before a normal human
consciousness of today: the man would be shattered, so dreadful, so alarming,
would seem the world which is nevertheless all around us; for this world is
there behind everything, it is all around us — but it is covered over
by the world of our ego. There is a world around us which would fill the man of
today with fear, would shatter him with terror, if he were suddenly confronted
by it. But the ancient Greek felt this too. That is also implicit in the
wonderful, wisdom-filled form of the Dionysos saga. Dionysos had to come from
another direction from that of the world-wonders in which the ancient Greek
consciousness had placed Zeus and the other figures of the upper gods; the
ancient Greek felt that in what constituted the world of men there lived
something different from what lived in the gods of Zeus's world.
That the world
in which we live has a heterogeneous constituent was felt too by the Greek. He
felt that an element is included in our physical human existence that is
certainly not present in the supersensible world. Hence the younger Dionysos,
macrocosmic representative of our modern ego-consciousness, could not be like
the elder Dionysos, a son of Persephone and Zeus, but he had to be a son of an
earthly mother—he was the son of Semele and Zeus. But we must bear in mind what
the Greek consciousness added in the further development of this saga. It was
brought about through the machinations of Hera that Semele saw Zeus in his true
form, not as the old Atlantean hero, but as he now is. That could only happen by
means of clairvoyant consciousness. What then does it mean that Semele was to
see Zeus for a moment as he now is? It simply means that Semele became for a
moment clairvoyant. She was destroyed by flame because she saw Zeus in the
flames of the astral world. Semele bears witness to this human tragedy, a
tragedy which would immediately come about if man, unprepared, were to enter
clairvoyantly the spiritual world.
Hidden somewhere
or other in the world of the Greek tales, all the truths about the wonders of
the world are to be found. We find secreted there how Dionysos, the macrocosmic
representative of the ego—the ego which no man endowed with normal consciousness
can see in more than one exemplar —derives from a being of the physical world;
that, so to say, what only meets the eye for normal physical consciousness as a
maya was embodied in Dionysos; in other words, we see how Dionysos had to
participate in the great Illusion, in maya. Today when we discuss the
wonders of the world in our prosaic, dry-as-dust way, we speak of physical,
chemical, biological laws. The Greek used splendid pictures which really
penetrate far deeper into those wonders than our laws that only skim the
surface. This is true of the whole world of Greek legend and Greek
mythology.
Thus we see as
if in a mighty occult script the question arising out of this Greek myth. If
this essential human ego is to manifest in a bodily form, can we expect to see
it in the human form we have in the physical world? No, for this form is
maya, it is not at all a manifestation of the real ego, it is truly of
such a nature that the real egos in Adam and Eve were right to be ashamed of it.
What we as men are confronted by today is in fact a real contradiction, and the
Greek felt that too. Although it has often been said, very superficially, that
he only paid attention to the outer beauties of Nature, even the Greek felt the
self-contradiction in the external human form. He was not a naturalist in the
sense in which modern man believes he was, but he felt profoundly that the human
form as it walks the Earth today is a compromise; from no aspect does it show
itself to be what in reality it ought to be. Suppose for a moment that the human
form had only arisen under the influence of physical, etheric, and astral bodies,
suppose that no ego had entered into this human form: then it would have been
fashioned as it was when it came over from the previous embodiments of our
Earth, as it came over from Saturn, Sun, and Moon. Then the human form would be
different from what it actually is. If the Earth had not endowed man with the
ego, men would be walking about with quite different-looking physical forms.
Secretly, in the depths of his soul, the ancient Greek wondered what the human
form would look like if earthly men today were ego-less, if men had not
participated in the blessings bestowed by the Earth, had not participated in the
coming into existence of the ego, had not taken Dionysos into themselves! If
there were among us on the Earth men who had developed purely under the
influence of the forces of physical, etheric, and astral bodies, he wondered what
they would look like. And the Greek — uplifted, inspired by the spirit, and
moved by unutterable depth of feeling — even put to himself the corresponding
question: ‘If there were only the ego, if the ego had not been drawn into the
physical, etheric, and astral bodies, how would it be formed?’
It would not
have a physical body such as it has now, it would have a spiritual body that
would be quite different from our external human body. But this spirit-body
exists only for a clairvoyant consciousness, it is nowhere to be seen in the
physical world. What, then, really is the man who actually walks about the
Earth? He is neither the ego-less man, purely under the influence of astral,
etheric, and physical bodies, nor is he the ego-man, but a compromise between the
two, something coming about as the result of a combination of both. The man we
see before us is a composite being. The Greeks felt this and they said to
themselves: ‘Since Dionysos, the younger Dionysos, is really the first teacher
of intellectual civilization, we must imagine him as not yet in a body which has
already been subjected to the influence of the ego, for it is through the effect
of the Dionysos civilization that man has first to acquire the intellectual ego.
Therefore Dionysos must be represented as this human ego still outside the human
body.’ So when the Greeks depicted the procession of Dionysos, which I have
called a march of civilization, they could only accurately represent it on the
basis that the essential ego of Dionysos had not yet entered the human body, but
was just on the point of doing so; they could only imagine that Dionysos and all
his followers had the kind of bodies which would inevitably come about if there
were no egos in them, if their bodies were under the influence of forces
emanating only from the physical, etheric, and astral bodies. They said to
themselves: ‘Dionysos and his rout should not look like the man of today, whose
bodies are the combined result of the invisible ego and the visible body, but
the invisible ego should hover as an aura over the bodily form and the body
should be so fashioned as would inevitably come about under the sole influence
of physical, etheric, and astral bodies, that is, as a man would inevitably be
formed if he had continued to develop the forces he had brought over from the
Moon without taking in the Earth ego.’
Because the
Greek soul has given a graphic answer to this world-riddle quite in accordance
with the truth, it has portrayed in the figure of Dionysos, and particularly in
the figures of those who constituted his band of followers, human figures who
have the ego outside them, and whose own external forms really show only the
forces of physical, etheric, and astral bodies. These are the satyrs and Sileni
who follow Dionysos on his travels, that wonderful creation of picture forms
which comes to us from Greek thought. That is what man would look like if we
were able to separate the composite form into its component parts. Imagine for a
moment that by some kind of magic the physical, etheric, and astral bodies of a
man could be so treated that the invisible, supersensible body of the ego could
be torn out of him: then he would turn into a figure resembling those who
followed in the train of Dionysos.
But the Greeks
in their admirable mythology have also drawn attention to something else. We
know that the ego has only gradually drawn into the human form, that in the time
of Atlantis it was not yet within the body. What then, were these Atlantean
bodies like? In the satyrs and the fauns and in Pan, as we shall see later,
Greek fantasy and Greek intuition has elaborated pictures of the average
Atlantean. Under present Earth conditions such human forms can of course no
longer arise. The figures of the satyrs and the fauns and the whole rout of
Dionysos represented those stragglers who had most closely retained the ancient
Atlantean form. Dionysos had to take with him on his travels the very men who
bore the least trace of the ego within them, because he was to become the ego's
first teacher.
We see then that
the Greeks represented in this train of Dionysos the forms of average Atlantean
men. Atlantean men were so formed that they did not have skeletons such as men
have today. The human body has become more solid; it was much softer in
Atlantean times. For this reason it was incapable of preservation, and the
geology, the palaeontology, of today will be hard put to it to find any trace of
the real Atlantean man. But a geology, a palaeontology, of quite a different
kind has preserved the Atlantean man for us! It is not in the geological strata
of the Earth that we have to delve if we wish to know the man of prehistoric
times, the man whose higher corporeality was still outside the physical body. To
burrow in the earth is quite absurd; in the earth we shall never find traces of
prehistoric man which are anything but decadent. But in the strata of human
spiritual life, in the strata of spiritual geology which have been preserved for
us in the wonderful Greek mythology, there we shall find the normal, average,
Atlantean man, just as in the geological strata of the Earth we find snail
shells and mussel shells. Let us study the configuration of the fauns, of Pan
and of Silenus: it is there that we have the spiritual fossils which lead us to
the Earth's prehistoric humanity. Therein we see how the ancient Greek
consciousness had an answer to wonders of the world which today may be dubbed
sentimental, dreamy, fantastic, but which nevertheless was imbued with a kind of
science more profound than our modern abstract, prosaic, intellectual science.
There are today many Darwinian and anti-Darwinian hypotheses as to what
prehistoric man looked like. The Greeks set this world-riddle before us in a way
that can satisfy the soul. Neither Haeckelism nor any other branch of Darwinism,
nor the excavations of geology, tell us anything about the outward appearance of
prehistoric man, but Greek mythology has supplied the answer to this question
for us by its representations of the rout of Dionysos in its plastic art.
We must come to
feel that Greek mythology really provides a serious answer to questions about
the wonders of the world, and then we shall be able to enter into it ever more
deeply. It is only someone who does not understand what underlies these things
who can say ‘I can't accept that interpretation, it is too far-fetched.’ Anyone
who knows the whole story in all its ramifications, besides knowing the true
development of man as revealed by the Akasha Chronicle knows that there is
nothing fantastic, nothing sentimental in what is being put before you today as
spiritual science. The fancifulness, the sentimentality, lies in the abstract,
empirical science of today, which imagines that it can dig up from the strata of
the physical Earth something that is not there, and can make a study of that
while it ignores the wondrous script of spiritual geology which comes before us,
to the rescue of human wisdom and its evolution, in the impressive mythology of
ancient Greece.
No comments:
Post a Comment