Part 9 (1/2)

And this correspondent of whom I speak - you can perhaps best judge of the confusion of his head through his instincts if I read you a characteristic sentence showing his fear that questions concerning world-conception play into these plays of the two authors. Just think, the man

goes as far as writing the following: 'But Pulver's belief in Christ ought to grow out of depths of sorrow and doubt if from the stage he wished to win disciples. The star flower plucked by Reinhart's seeker after Paradise at his studio window in the very first scene ought to bloom only at the end and from a bleeding heart.'

And now comes the sentence which I mean: 'Both poets had their world conception already complete in their head as they began to write; it would have been better for the dramas if they had had to wrestle for their religion as they wrote.'

Now just think of that: nowadays one manages to make it a serious fault for anyone with a world conception to write! One is supposed to sit down as a perfect fool in face of the world to scribble away, and then in the scribbling, at the end, a world-conception is supposed to spring forth. Then the thing is produced at the theatre, and this is supposed to please the audience! Just imagine such stupid nonsense being actually spread abroad

in the world today; and many people do not notice that such rubbish is being circulated.

Such things simply depend on the fact that the life of the head is not worked on by the whole man.

For of course the journalist who wrote that was a very 'clever man'. That should not be disputed.

He is very clever. But it is of no possible use to be clever, if the cleverness is mere head-life. That is the important thing to keep in mind; that is extraordinarily important.

Here we touch upon something fundamental, very necessary to our present civilization. One can make such observations in fact at every turn.

Logical slips are not made today because people have no logic, but because it is not enough to have logic. One can be wonderfully logical, pa.s.s examinations splendidly, be a brilliant University Professor of National Economy, or any other subject, and in spite of being so clever and having any amount of logic in one's head, one can nevertheless go off the rails again and again. One can accomplish nothing connected with real life, if

one has not the patience to lead over into the whole man what is grasped by the head, when one has not patience to call on the rejuvenating forces in human nature. That is the point in question.

Anyone having to do with true science, such as spiritual science, knows that he would be ashamed to give a lecture tomorrow on what he had found out or learnt today - because he knows that that would be absolutely valueless. It would only have value years afterwards. The conscientious spiritual investigator cannot lecture by giving out what he has only recently learnt; but he must keep the things continually present in his soul so that they may ripen. If he brings forward what he has only just acquired he must at least make special reference to the fact, so that his audience may make note of it. One will only be really able to see what the present time needs if one bears in mind these demands on human nature. For what is necessary for the present age does not lie where today it is mostly sought; it lies in finer structures that nevertheless are everywhere spread abroad.

One really need not touch on politics in calling attention to the following:

There are numbers of people today - more than is good for the world at any rate - who are of opinion that this war must continue as long as possible so that, from it, general peace may arise.

If one ends it too quickly, one does peace no service. In the last few days - in what I say now I am pa.s.sing no judgment on the value or lack of value of the so-called peace negotiations between the Central Powers and Russia, but it has been interesting all the same in the last few days to see what a curious sort of logic it is possible to work out. I have been given an article that is really extraordinarily interesting in this sense. The gentleman in question (his name is of no consequence here) argues against a so-called separate peace because he considers that through it universal peace would not be furthered. A direct way of thinking - but one perhaps that has gone a little deeper - might rather say to itself 'Well, we may make a certain amount of progress if at least in one spot on earth we leave off mowing each other down'. That would perhaps be a straightforward, direct mode of thinking. But a thinking that is not so direct might be thus

expressed: 'No, one really dare not leave off in one place, for in that way ”universal peace” would not be promoted.' And now the gentleman in question gives interesting explanations - that is, explanations interesting to himself - as to how people quarrel over words. It is his opinion that those people who say 'One must be enthusiastic about any peace, even if it is only a separate peace', are only hypnotized by words. But one must not be dependent on words; one must go to the core of the matter, and the matter is just this - that a separate peace is harmful to the general peace of the world. Among the various arguments that the gentleman adduces is one of the following sentence, an interesting sentence, a most characteristic one for the present day - where is one to begin, not to reduce matters too much to the personal? - Well - 'Whoever is honest must admit that this is the motive of many' (not all!) 'among us who so delight in a ”separate peace”

and in Lenin and Trotsky', (he means that enthusiasm for the word 'peace' is the motive) 'while at the same time they shout tirelessly against anti-militarists and show little appreciation

for our Lenins and Trotskys'. (He is speaking of Switzerland.) 'We, however, who are not dupes of any word, but want to get at the matter itself, we do not want simply German peace, but peace, we want general peace. For us the word ”separate” is a contradiction to the word ”peace”.'

(If one goes into it seriously, one must carefully distinguish between peace and peace! Moreover the article is headed 'Peace and Peace'.) ... 'We too who do not want German peace, but peace, we want general peace. For us the word ”separate” stands in contradiction to the word ”peace”.'

Thus the gentleman who inveighs throughout the whole article against the wors.h.i.+p of a word, then writes the following: '... For us the word ”separate” stands in contradiction to the word ”peace”. Separation is the principle of strife, not the principle of peace.

After this World-War we need a World-Peace in

which all nations come at the same time to a great mutual agreement. What we see in Brest-Litowsk, this game of a select circle of diplomats, imbued with all the subtleties of diplomacy, with the naivete, the idealism, (also the dogmatism) of the representatives of a new order, is a spectacle that can please no one who wishes the ideal to remain pure. It is to be feared that we may get a Devil's peace, which will only produce more frightful war, instead of G.o.d's peace which finally leads to an end to all war.'

Well, my dear friends, this is certainly logic, for the article is written with ingenuity; it is brilliantly ingenious. This article 'Peace and Peace' is even boldly and courageously written in face of the prejudice of countless people, but its logic is devoid of any connection with reality. For the connection with reality is only found through that of which we have spoken, through the maturing of knowledge; what the head can experience must be reflected upon in the rest of man and this must mature. It may be said that what the very clever men of today lack most of all is this becoming

ripe. It is something that is connected with the deepest needs and deepest impulses of the present.

You see, the present day has no inclination at all to go in for the study of these things. Naturally I do not mean that every single person can go in for such study, but men whose metier is study, ought to occupy themselves with such things, and then that would pa.s.s over into the common consciousness of mankind. For do we not find that journalists - with all respect be it spoken - write what they find accepted as general opinion.

If instead of Wilsonianism or some such thing, Mohammedanism were to be represented as the accepted common opinion, European journalists would write away about something Mohammedan.

And if spiritual science had already grown into a habit in human souls, then the same journalists who today grumble at Spiritual Science would, of course, write very finely in the sense of Spiritual Science. But nowadays there is a disinclination to go into such things among the very people whose task it should be.

You see, as man stands here on the earth, he is really connected with the whole cosmos. And I have said before that what holds good today on earth has naturally not always held good. That we may be informed at least about the most important things, we shall speak now princ.i.p.ally of the period of time since the great Atlantean deluge, the Flood. Geology calls it the Ice Age. We know that changes took place in mankind at that time, but there was a humanity upon earth even before this, although in a different form. (You can read in Occult Science how mankind lived then.) The Atlantean evolution preceded the present evolution. In that part of the earth, for instance, where the Atlantic Ocean is today - as we have often said - there was land. A great part of present-day Europe was then under the sea - conditions on earth were quite different during the age of this Atlantean humanity. The ancient Atlantean civilization went down. The Post- Atlantean has taken its place. But the Atlantean followed the so-called Lemurian civilization, which again had several epochs. Thus we can say that we are in the post-Atlantean civilization in the

fifth epoch, following the first, second, third and fourth epochs. Before this was the Atlantean civilization with its seven epochs (see diagram), before this again was the Lemurian civilization with its seven epochs. Let us turn our attention to the seventh epoch of the Lemurian civilization. It lies approximately 25,900 years before our epoch.

It was about 25,000-26,000 years ago that this seventh epoch of the Lemurian age came to an end on earth. However remarkable it may sound, there is a certain resemblance between this seventh Lemurian epoch and our own epoch. Similarities are as we know always to be found between successive periods, similarities of the most diverse kinds. We have found a close similarity between our age and the Egypto-Chaldean. We will now speak of one which is more distant; there is also externally, cosmically, a resemblance. You know that our epoch which begins in about the 15th century of the Christian era is connected with the cosmos through the fact that since that time the sun has its Vernal Point in Pisces, in the constellation of Pisces, the Fishes. The sun had previously been for 2,160 years in the

constellation of Aries, the Ram, at the Vernal Equinox. Here in this seventh Lemurian epoch (left) there were similar conditions. Twelve epochs ago the sun was in the same position. So that towards the end of the Lemurian age there were conditions similar to ours.

This similarity contains, however, an important difference. You see, what we acquire today of inner force of spirit and head-experience, as we have described it in these studies, was also experienced by the Lemurian human being of that time, though in a different manner. The Lemurian man was const.i.tuted in quite a different way from the man of today, as you may read in my Occult Science. What could enter into him out of the universe, really entered right in. So that the Lemurian man received practically the same wisdom as the man of today gains I through his head, but it streamed into him out of the universe, I and only in this sense was it different. His head was still open, his head was still susceptible to the