Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

Wonders of the World, Ordeals of the Soul, Revelations of the Spirit
GA 129

18 August 1911, Munich

1. The origin of dramatic art in European cultural life. The Mystery Of Eleusis

The opening words of our festival this year were put into the mouth of Hermes,1Dr. Steiner is referring to the opening words of Edouard Schuré's The Mystery of Eleusis, a performanee of which in the German language together with performances of the first two of Dr. Steiner's own Mystery Plays had preceded the giving of these lectures. the messenger of the gods, and in view of what our own Spiritual Science aspires to be, we may perhaps look upon this as symbolic. For to us Spiritual Science is not just a source of ordinary worldly knowledge, but a ‘mediator’; through it we may indeed rise up into those super-sensible worlds whence according to the ancient Greeks it was Hermes who brought down the spark which could kindle in men the strength to ascend thither. And taking my start from these words of Hermes, I may perhaps be allowed to add to what has resounded during the last few days out of the performances themselves some observations linking them with the lectures that are to follow.

These performances have not been given merely as a sort of embellishment of our festival; they should be regarded as deeply integral part of the annual celebration which has been held here for many years, and as the focus of our spiritual-scientific activity here in Munich. This year we have been able to open with a renewal of the drama which is the origin of all western dramatic art, a drama which we can only really grasp by looking beyond the whole historical tradition of dramatic art in the West. This also makes it a worthy introduction to a spiritual-scientific festival, for it takes us back into ages of European cultural development when the several activities of the human mind and soul which today we find separated as science, art and religion were not yet sundered from one another. It carries us back in feeling to the very first beginnings of European cultural development, to times when a unified culture, born directly out of the deepest spiritual life, fired men with religious fervour for the highest that the human soul can reach; it was a culture pulsating with religious life, indeed it may be said that it was religion. Men did not look upon religion as a separated branch of their culture, but they still spoke of religion, even when their minds were directly concerned with the practical affairs of everyday life. That very concern itself was raised to the level of a religion, for religion shed its rays over every experience which man could have. But this archetypal religion was inwardly very strong, very powerful in its particular workings. It did not confine itself to a vaguely exalted religious response to great powers of the universe; its inspiration was so strong that some of those particular workings took forms which were none other than those of art. Religious life overflowed into bold forms, and religion was one with art. Art was the daughter of religion, and still lived in the closest ties of kinship with her mother. No religious feeling in our own day has the intensity which imbued those who took part in the ancient Mysteries and saw religious life pouring itself into the forms of art.

But this archetypal religion and its daughter, art, were at the same time so purified, so lifted into the refining spheres of etheric spiritual life that their influence even brought out in human souls something of which today we have a faint reflection, an abstract reflection, in our science and knowledge. When feeling became more intense, became filled with enthusiasm for what as religion overflowed into artistic form, then knowledge of the gods and of divine things, knowledge of spirit-land, was kindled in the soul. Thus knowledge was the other daughter of religion, and she too lived in close family relationship with the archetypal mother of all culture.

If we ask ourselves what we are hoping to achieve with today's feeble beginning ... the answer is that we would rekindle in mankind something like a unification, a harmony, between art and science. For only thus can the soul, fired by feeling, strengthened by the best in our will, imbue every aspect of human culture with that singleness of vision which will lead men up again into the divine heights of his existence, while. at the same time it permeates the most commonplace actions of everyday life. Then what we call profane life will became holy, for it is only profane because its connection with the divine source of all existence has been forgotten.

The festival we have organised this year is meant to be a direct expression of this feeling, which simply must enliven us if the truths of Spiritual Science are to enter into the depths of human souls. That is why it is in accordance with spiritual science, in the literal meaning of those words, that we should look upon The Mystery of Eleusis as a kind of sun which, shedding its rays in our hearts, can arouse a true perception of what Spiritual Science is.

What is generally known as drama, what is recognised in the West as dramatic art and reached its culmination in Shakespeare, is a current of spiritual life originating in the Mystery; it is a secularisation of the ancient Mystery. If we trace it back to its origin, we come to something like The Mystery of Eleusis.

We already had all this in mind some years ago, when we produced this very drama at the Munich Congress of the Theosophical Society. I may perhaps mention an incident which may throw light upon our aims, for day-to-day happenings do have a dose bearing upon the spiritual ideal which hovers before our minds. When some time ago we were beginning to prepare for the production of The Children of Lucifer,2Les Enfants de Lucifer, Edouard Schuré, (Paris, Perrin et Cie, 1922).
English translation, The Children of Lucifer by B. Kemmis, (Rudolf Steiner Publishing Company, 1935)
The production to which Dr. Steiner refers was from a German translation by Marie von Sivers put into free verse by Rudolf Steiner, but not published until 1955, under the title Lucifer, Die Kinder des Lucifer. (Rudolf Steiner Nachlassverwaltung, Dornach, Switzerland.)
I remembered something which I think greatly influenced the course of our Middle European spiritual-scientifie development. When I myself judged that the time had come for me to bring my spiritual work into connection with what we may call Anthroposophy or Spiritual Science, it was a discussion about this play, The Children of Lucifer, which gave me the opportunity I needed. Following upon that talk we allowed our thoughts about our work to pass through a period of development of seven years; but the seed which had been laid in our souls with the words spoken about The Children of Lucifer meanwhile developed silently in our hearts, according to the law of the seven-yearly rhythm. At the end of the seven years we were ready to produce a German version of The Children of Lucifer at the opening of our annual festival at Munich.

In today's talk, which is to serve as an introduction to the lectures which are to follow, I may perhaps be allowed to link this thought with another, which springs from the depths of my heart, out of deepest conviction. The kind of spiritual life which in future will increasingly influence western minds will have to be cast in a specific form. Today it is possible to think of Anthroposophy or Spiritual Science in various ways. Men do not always think in accordance with the necessities of existence, in accordance with the evolutionary forces at work in man, but they think in conformity with their own will, their own sentiment; thus one person may regard this, the other that, as the right ideal. There are many ideals of Anthroposophy, according to the dispositions of men's hearts, according as their sentiments and feelings incline them this way or that. True occultism at a somewhat higher level shows us however that such hankerings after an ideal are always something connected with our own personality. Ideals of this kind are really only what one or another would like to think of as Anthroposophy, something which his own peculiar sentiment and the make-up of his intellect causes him to believe the best. Anthroposophy is not the only thing about which men form their opinions out of feelings and personal motives, but Spiritual Science must learn not to take what springs from our own personal feeling as the standard of measurement. As persons we are always liable to err, however much we may believe ourselves to be cherishing an unselfish ideal. We can only form an opinion about what has to happen in human evolution when we entirely suppress our own personal feelings about the ideal, and no longer ask what we ourselves consider the best way to treat of Spiritual Science. For we can only come to a true opinion if we let the necessities of life speak, quite regardless of our own inclinations, regardless of what particular expression of spiritual life we prefer; we can only arrive at a true opinion if we ask ourselves how European civilisation has taken shape in recent centuries, and what are its immediate needs. If we put the question to ourselves without bias, we get an answer which is twofold. Firstly, if European cultural life is not to dry up, to become a ‘waste land’, the great, the overwhelming need—shown by all that is happening in the life of the mind today—is Spiritual Science. Secondly, it needs a spiritual science suited to the conditions which have developed through the centuries, not in any one of us, but in Europe as a whole. But we shall only be able to give them a spiritual science which meets these conditions if we ask ourselves unselfishly what it is that Europeans have learnt to think and to feel during recent centuries, and what it is that they are thirsting for as a means for the spiritual deepening of their lives.

If we put this question to ourselves, then all the signs of the times show us that it cannot be a continuation of the occultism, the mysticism, which has been known for thousands of years, and which has been rich in blessing for diverse peoples. The continuation of this mystic lore as it has always been known, as it has been handed down by history, could not meet the needs of European civilisation. We should be committing a sin against European civilisation and everything connected with it if we were merely to immerse ourselves in ancient occultism; we should be putting our personal preferences above the necessities of existence. However great our personal inclination for some form or other of ancient occultism, let us suppress this, and ask ourselves what it is that men need in the conditions which have come about through centuries of development. The signs of the times make it equally clear that what we call modern science, however high may be the esteem in which it is held today, however great may be the authority which it enjoys, is like a tree that has passed its prime and will bear little fruit in future. When I say that what today is known as physical science is a withering branch in humanity's mental and spiritual heaven, I know that it will be thought a bold assertion, but it is at any rate not an idle one. Science has rendered good service; to throw light upon the conditions of its existence, as I have just done, is not to disparage it.

Neither ancient occultism nor modern science will serve to satisfy the deepest need of the humanity of the future, the need to establish a link between the human soul and spiritual revelation. That is what hovered before us, as if inscribed in letters of gold, when we began some years ago to develop the spiritual life on broader lines. And if I may be allowed to say something which is as much a matter of feeling as of conviction, I would say that, considered objectively and without bias in relation to the question I have raised, the work of our esteemed friend Edouard Schuré, Les Grands Initiés,3First edition 1889 (Perrin et Cie. Paris). English edition, The Great Initiates, translated by Fred Rothwell in two volumes,. (Rider & Co. London) (o.p.). American edition translated by Gloria Raspberry, 1961. (Rudolf Steiner Publications Ltd., West Nyack, New York). steering as it does a middle course between purely historical occultism, which can be read up anywhere from historical records, and the academic learning which is a withering branch of civilisation, is an extremely important literary beginning with the kind of spiritual life which will be needed all over Europe in the future. It is a most significant beginning towards the apprehension of true Anthroposophy, an Anthroposophy which observes life directly, sees how spiritual life at present is a slow trickle, sees how the stream will widen. I pointed this out at the commencement of my lectures here a year ago.4Lecture-Course translated into English under the title of Genesis: Secrets of the Bible Story of Creation, (Anthroposophical Publishing Co. London). Anyone who can to some extent see into the future, anyone who sees what that future demands of us, knows that with Les Grands Initiés a first literary step has been taken along that golden middle road between ancient occultism and modern, but decadent, science, and that this beautiful and important beginning which has already been made by that book for all European countries, will assume ever further forms. The book is coloured by a turn of thought which does not impress us sympathetically just because of our own personal preferences for this or that form of spiritual science, but because we see that the necessities of European civilisation, making themselves felt ever more insistently, demanded that such a literary beginning should be made. If you know this book, you know how impressively it calls attention to the Mystery of Eleusis, a subject which Schuré subsequently developed further in Sanctuaires d'Orient.5Sanctuaires d'Orient, par Edouard Schuré. (Perrin et Cie, Paris).

What kind of thoughts are aroused in us by these indications—anthroposophical in the best sense—which we find in Les Grands Initiés, and by the reconstruction of the Mystery of Eleusis? If we look back to the original sources of European artistic and spiritual life, we find there two figures, figures which have a deep significance for a truly theosophical grasp of the whole of modern spiritual life—two figures which stand out as symbolical presentations of great spiritual impulses. To those who can look below the surface of the spiritual life of today these figures appear like two beams of prophetic light: they are Persephone and Iphigenia. With these two names we are in a way touching upon what are really two souls in modern man, two souls whose union is only achieved through the severest ordeals. In the course of the next few days we shall see more clearly how Persephone arouses in our hearts the thought of an impulse to which we have often alluded in our spiritual-scientific studies. Once upon a time it was given to mankind to acquire knowledge in a way different from that of today. From earlier lectures we know of an ancient clairvoyance which in primeval times welled forth in human nature, so that clairvoyant pictures took shape in men's souls, as inevitably as hunger and thirst and the need for air arise in their bodies—pictures filled with the secrets of the spiritual worlds. This was the primeval gift of seership which man once possessed, and of which he was so to say bereft by the gradual birth in him of knowledge in its later form. The ancient Greek partly felt that in his own time the rape of ancient clairvoyance by modern knowledge was already taking place and partly foresaw that this would happen more and more in the future—a future which has become our own present. He thus turned his gaze upwards to that divine figure who released in the human soul directly out of elemental Nature the forces which led to that ancient clairvoyance. He looked up to that goddess called Persephone, who was the regent of this old clairvoyance bound up with human nature. And then this ancient Greek said to himself: ‘In place of this ancient clairvoyance another culture will become more and more widespread, a civilisation directed by men themselves and born of them, born of men to whom the ancient clairvoyance is already lost.’

In the civilisation which the ancient Greek associated with the names of Agamemnon, Odysseus, Menelaus, we find the external civilisation which we know today, untouched by forces of clairvoyance. It is a civilisation whose knowledge of nature and her laws is assumed to be as useful for finding a philosophical basis for the secrets of existence as it is for making armaments. But men no longer feel that this kind of mental culture requires a sacrifice—they no longer feel that in order to achieve it they must offer sacrifice in a deeper sense to the higher spiritual Beings who direct the super-sensible worlds. These sacrifices are in fact being made, but men are as yet too inattentive to notice them. The ancient Greek did notice that this external culture which he traced back to Agamemnon, Menelaus, Odysseus, involved sacrifice; it is the daughter of the human spirit who in a certain way has to be sacrificed ever anew. And he represented this perpetual sacrifice demanded by intellectual culture as the sacrifice of Iphigenia, daughter of Agamemnon. Thus to the question raised by the sacrifice of Iphigenia there resounds a wonderful answer! If nothing but that external culture which can be traced back, as the ancient Greek understood it, to Agamemnon, Menelaus, Odysseus, were given to mankind, then under its influence men's hearts, the deepest forces of souls, would have withered away. It is only because mankind retained the feeling that it should make perpetual sacrifice and should single out, set apart from this general intellectual culture, rites which, not superficially, but in a more profound sense, may be called sacerdotal—it is only because of this that this intellectual civilisation has been saved from drying up completely. Just as Iphigenia was offered to Artemis as a sacrifice, but through her sacrifice became a priestess, so in the course of bygone millennia certain elements of our intellectual civilisation have had repeatedly to be cleansed and purified and given a sacerdotal-religious character in sacrifice to the higher gods, so that they should not cause the hearts and souls of men to wither up. Just as Persephone stands for the leader of the ancient clairvoyant culture, so Iphigenia represents the perpetual sacrifice which our intellectuality has to make to the deeper religious life.

These two factors have already been alive in European cultural life from the time of ancient Greece right up to the present time—from the time when Socrates first wrested scientific thinking from the old unified culture, right up to the time when poor Nietzsche, in travail of his soul, had recourse to the separation of the three branches of culture—science, art and religion—and lost his balance as a result. Because forces are already working towards the reunification of what for millenia has had to be separated, because the future already lights up the present with its challenge, the present age, through its representatives—men inspired by the Spirits of the Age—has had to realise anew the two impulses just characterised, and to connect them with the names of Persephone and Iphigenia. And if one realises this, it brings home to one the significance of Goethe's action in immersing himself in the life of ancient Greece and expressing in the symbol of Iphigenia what he himself felt to be the culmination of his art. When he wrote his Iphigenia, which in a way brings to symbolic expression the whole of his work, Goethe made his first contact with the spiritual riches of European antiquity. Out of that deed of Goethe's there resounds to us today the secret thought: ‘If Europe is not to be blighted by her intellectuality we must remember the perpetual sacrifice which intellectual culture has to make to religious culture.’ The whole compass of intellectual civilisation furnishes for the higher spiritual life an atmosphere as harsh as King Thoas in Iphigenia. But in the figure of Iphigenia herself we meet gentleness and harmony, which do not hate with those that hate but love with those who love. Thus when Goethe was inspired in presenting his Iphigenia to Europe to testify to the perpetual sacrifice of intellectuality it was a first reminder of all-important impulses for the spiritual life of Europe. We may indeed feel that his soul was enlightened by the spiritual inspirers of modern times.

A second reminder was needed, for which we have had to wait a little longer—one which points to an age when the old clairvoyant culture was still alive, the culture associated with the name of Persephone. In that chapter of Les Grands Initiés which rises to a certain climax in the description of the Mystery of Eleusis, one again feels inspirers of European spiritual life working to conjure up out of the glimmering darkness of the age a growing recognition that the old clairvoyant culture represented by Persephone must light up again. One pole of modern European spiritual life was given in the revival of the ancient Iphigenia-figure; the other pole comes with the recreation of the Mystery of Eleusis by Edouard Schuré. And we must regard it as one of the most fortunate of the stars that rule our efforts, that this performance of The Mystery of Eleusis is allowed to shed its light upon our anthroposophical life in the presence of its recreator, who has now for several years rejoiced us by his presence.

What I have just said is only partly a matter of feeling. From another aspect it is a thought springing from the most sober and objective conviction. If I have expressed this conviction today, it is because I agree with Goethe that ‘only what proves fruitful is true’—a pearl of wisdom for our whole pursuit of knowledge. If there is any sign of fruitfulness in what we have been doing for years past, we may acknowledge that the thinking which has inspired our work for many years, the thinking which has always been present with us as a hidden guest, as a comrade in arms, has shown itself to be true by its fruitfulness. In the next few days, when we come to talk about ‘Wonders of Nature, Ordeals of the Soul and Revelations of the Spirit’ we shall have much to say in illustration of our theme which will have a bearing upon what I have just said about Iphigenia and Persephone. Here let me preface that as Iphigenia is the daughter of Agamemnon—one of those Heroes to whom the ancient Greek traced the cult of its intellectuality in its widest sense, with the practical and aggressive forms it takes—so Persephone is the daughter of Demeter. Now we shall see that Demeter is the ruler of the greatest wonders of Nature, she is an archetypal form which points to a time when the life of the human brain was not yet cut off from the general bodily life, a time when nutrition by external foodstuffs and thinking through the instrument of the brain were not separate functions. When the crops were thriving in the fields it was still felt at that time that thinking was alive there, that hope was outpoured over the fields and penetrated the activity of Nature's wonder like the song of the lark. It was still felt that along with material substance spiritual life is absorbed into the human body, becomes purified, becomes spirit—as the archetypal mother, out of whom what is born elementally becomes Persephone in the human being himself. The name of Demeter points us back to those far distant times when human nature was so unified that all bodily life was at the same time spiritual, that all bodily assimilation went hand in hand with spiritual assimilation, assimilation of thought. Today we can only learn what things were like then from the Akashic record. It is from the Akashic record that we learn that Persephone is the true daughter of Demeter. It is there too that we learn that Eros, another figure who appears in the reconstruction of the Mystery of Eleusis, represents the means whereby, according to Greek sentiment, the forces of Demeter in the course of human development have become what they are today. When Demeter stands before us on the stage, with the stern admonition of a primeval force, for ever and as if by enchantment permeating all human feeling, the whole marvel of human nature is immediately conjured up before our souls. Something stands before us there in Demeter which speaks throughout all ages of time as an impulse of human nature. When Demeter is on the stage we feel it streaming towards us. She is the mightiest representative of ‘chastity’—as today we abstractly call it—that archetypal force with all its fruitful efficacy when it is not mere asceticism, but embraces humanity's archetypal love. On the other hand what speaks to us in the figure of Eros? It is budding, innocent love. Eros is its ruler ... that is what the Greeks felt.

Now the drama unfolds. What are the forces which are at work with supporting life-giving power throughout the whole drama from beginning to end? Chastity, which is at the same time archetypal love in all its fruitfulness, in its interplay with budding, innocent love. This is what holds sway in the drama, just as positive and negative electricity hold sway in the everyday wonders of Nature. Thus throughout the space into which this pregnant archetypal drama is poured, there may be more or less consciously sensed something of the forces which have been at work since the beginning of time and which still permeate our modern life; though those archetypal currents, the Demeter current and the Eros current, will in the future become more and more absorbed in a way by the tendencies represented in the three figures Luna, Astrid and Philia. This will be further elucidated in the next few days. We shall be shown a living relationship between the currents which are those of man's origin—Demeter and Eros with Persephone between them—and on the other hand something which dawns in us today in a form as yet impersonal; it is like a spiritual conscience which as yet calls to us from the unknown and does not venture upon the stage; it is only a voice from without. I am speaking of the three figures Luna, Astrid, Philia, the true daughters of Persephone.

I have tried to put before you the feelings which prompted us to give pride of place, at the opening of our studies, to The Mystery of Eleusis in its reconstruction by Edouard Schuré. No doubt the training you have received in recent years will enable you to view our present performances of this important work in the way which should come naturally to us in the anthroposophical Movement. Today it is frightfully easy to taunt us with amateurishness in comparison with what we are given as dramatic art in the world outside; it is easy to point out the mistakes which we all make if with our feeble capacities we tackle such a great work as this Mystery of Eleusis. But we are not trying, or at any rate we ought not to be trying, to represent things in the same manner as is done on the ordinary modern stage. Those today who already have some inkling of the impress our special kind of spiritual knowledge should give to art will know that we are aiming at something quite different. They will also know that performances which will only be able to achieve a certain perfection in the future must make a beginning in all their imperfection in the present. We are not called upon to compete with ordinary stage performances. We do not dream of such a thing, and it is a mistake even to make such comparisons. Let the dramatic critic say what he will about other stage performances, he is a mere amateur as regards what Spiritual Science is aiming at, what it must aim at, even in the realm of art.

Those of you who can share the profound gratitude which I feel every time at the opening of our Munich festivals to all who have helped to bring them about will not think it inappropriate or too personal if again this year I express my thanks to them at the close of this introductory lecture. Not only have many hands been needed to make this festival possible, but it has needed souls who have already permeated themselves with what can be the finest fruit of a life of spiritual effort—spiritual warmth. This spiritual warmth is never without effect and always brings a gradually developing skill in its appropriate sphere. Thus, each time we set to work—first the small group of those here in Munich who are the forerunners of the larger community which then gathers here—we find ourselves filled with spiritual warmth, and, even when to begin with everything seems to go very badly, we have faith that our work must succeed. And it does succeed to the full extent of our capacities. This undertaking proves to us that spiritual forces hold sway in the world, that they help us, that we may entrust ourselves to them. And if sometimes it seems as if things are not going well, then we say to ourselves that if we are not successful it is because the powers behind our activity do not intend us to succeed, and not to succeed would then be the right thing. Thus we do what we have to do without giving a thought to the sort of performance which will finally emerge. We think of the spiritual forces, to which we too in the sense of our own time are making our puny sacrifice—the sacrifice of modern intellectuality to the religious deepening of the human heart. It is beautiful to see what spiritual warmth there is in that small group, wonderful to see how each individual in undertaking his or her by no means easy sacrificial task actually experiences something spiritual. It is a fraternal offering which those who participate in it carry out for us. Those who understand this will share the grateful feeling to which I now give expression.

Our thanks of course go in the first place to the recreator of the Mystery of Eleusis, and then to my numerous fellow-workers here in Munich. I remember especially those who throughout many years of work in the service of Spiritual Science, permeated with loving spiritual warmth, have felt the call to unite their knowledge and experience with what we here are trying to do. Let me first gratify a heartfelt wish by alluding to the two ladies who have co-operated with me in quite a special way, Fräulein Stinde and Countess Kalckreuth, so that today the beautiful harmony between their spiritual thinking and their purely technical work shines upon us everywhere in this Munich festival. Permit me to mention our good friend Adolf Arenson, who in this as in previous years has composed the music for all three plays. I leave it to your own hearts to judge of these compositions. I myself regard it as a fortunate destiny that our work should have been completed by the musical compositions of our dear friend Arenson. Further I feel it to be a particular mark of good fortune that the stage effects which hovered over the scenes and imbued them with a truly religious spirit should have been carried out so admirably by Baroness von Eckhardstein. To me every flicker of light, be it red or blue, every shade in the scenic effect, be it light or subdued, is important and meaningful, and that the Baroness should feel this is among the things which we should regard as indeed the work of the spirit.

I need only call your attention to the scenery contributed by our artists Herr Linde, Herr Folkert and Herr Hass, and in mentioning them I would like you to understand that the spiritual thought which lives in their souls has found its way even into their paint brushes. It is spirituality which you see in the scenery which these three have contributed. Of course in none of the things I have mentioned do we find perfection, but we find the beginning of an aim. I should like you to see in all that is willed here, in all that cannot yet be fully achieved, how one can think of the future development of art.

That is why it is so tremendously important too that the dramatic production should only be in the hands of actors who are striving for spiritual knowledge. It is my wish, not out of personal preference but because it cannot be otherwise, that not a single word in our dramatic performances should be spoken by anyone not of our way of thinking, even though those words should be spoken with perfect artistry and the utmost refinement of stage diction.

What we are aiming at is something quite different from the customary stage technique. We are not aiming at what people call art today; what we want is that in each of those who stand on the stage his heart should speak out of spiritual warmth, and that such an atmosphere should breathe through the whole performance, be that performance good or indifferent, that we should experience spiritual warmth as art and art as spiritual warmth. For this reason every one who is present at these dramatic festivals which precede our lecture cycles at Munich must feel, ‘there is not a word spoken in this production which is not experienced in the depths of the actor's soul.’ In many respects this results in a certain reserve, a certain restraint, which anyone who has no desire to feel in a spiritual way may regard as amateurish, but it is the beginning of something which is to come, the beginning of something which will one day be regarded as artistic truth in the deepest and most spiritual sense of the words, however imperfect and rudimentary it may seem to you today. Therefore it will never occur to those of you who have understanding to want to cut passages. You will calmly accept all the long passages necessitated by the subject. Nothing is too long for us, nothing too undramatic, in the modern, generally accepted sense of the word, because we are concerned, not with the demands of external ‘theatre’, but with the inner necessities of the subject, and we will never abandon our dramatic convictions. For example, take the fairy-tale you heard yesterday, the fairy-tale that Felicia tells Capesius in the fifth scene of my playThe Soul's Probation. The habitual theatre goer would pronounce it deadly dull. We must never shrink from putting long passages which may seem tedious on the stage, if dramatic truth calls for it. Dramatic truth is the overruling consideration in our productions.

Moreover, dramatic freedom demands that every individual who does us the favour of co-operating with us should have freedom of action as regards his own part, so that each one can feel that every action he makes and every word he utters on the stage proceeds from himself. You will never see in our performances an arbitrary stage-production such as is so very fashionable today. In its place you will feel the influence of that spirit which breathes unseen over our production as a whole, even if only in a rudimentary and imperfect way, but which is able to multiply its work in each individual concerned. Hence when one is involved in such an enterprise as this, one feels above all things profound gratitude for the sacrifices made by every single actor. It is not possible to mention each one individually, because so many have helped, but each one has accomplished much.

I might continue this catalogue of thanks for a long time. Lastly I might thank you all for having shown understanding for what one day, in the drama of the future, will be regarded as a sine qua non—that what is not seen on the stage must play its part as well as what is seen, that what is merely hinted at must have a place as well as the more material impersonations; that some figures must stand out in the illumination of the footlights, while others have rather to be secretly insinuated in the depths of the human word. What is intended in my Mystery Plays and will more and more be felt as the true meaning of the three figures Philia, Astrid and Luna can only partly be conveyed in the light in which they appear on the stage in bodily form; for with these three figures which are intended to represent important impulses of human evolution, intimate secrets of the soul are also bound up, intimate secrets which one only appreciates rightly by coupling what arrests one's attention by its strong illumination with what is suggested in the intimacy of the spoken word. These three feminine figures working in the silvery moonlight and fashioning from the evanescent forms taken by the spray the chalice which subtly represents what they are aiming at both in their more manifest as well as in their more delicate form—these beings whom we encounter in the silvery moonlight of the fairy-tale, and who show us how they accompany the souls of men as intimate friends, show us how men are formed in childhood, what they look like after thrice three hundred and sixty weeks have gone by—these beings can only be understood when one takes into consideration both aspects, the one grasped by the senses and outwardly visible, seen on the stage in tangible form, and the other aspect, which seems so tedious to the modern theatre goer, communicated through the telling of a delicate fairy-tale ... the only vehicle fit to convey the subtlety of meaning expressed by such figures as Luna, Astrid and Philia. And when one sees that already today there are a number of souls who are capable of pure unprejudiced feeling as regards what is not easily tolerated on the stage, then one can say ... Spiritual Science is grateful to you that you have been willing to train your souls to experience and absorb what has been attempted here in its service. For all these reasons, at the close of this introduction to our forthcoming lectures you will not mind my giving this expression to my gratitude.

Thankfulness and joy again and again fill me, not only when I see our fellow workers co-operate and adapt themselves to what is new, but also when I see men like our stage hands working for us so willingly. I feel it is really something to be thankful for, when one of the workmen asks if he too may have a book. I know well that everything is very rudimentary and imperfect, but it is something which will bear fruit, something which will work on. If out of all that we have attempted to do at the opening of our Munich festival one thing is impressed upon us—that Spiritual Science is not meant to be something abstract, a hobby which one pursues, but that it is related to the conditions of our whole life—then the modest effort which we have tried to make, as a beginning only, will have had its effect; something of what we have been aiming at will have been achieved. In this spirit I welcome you at the outset of this cycle of lectures, which is to be devoted to the study of many things we encounter when we direct our gaze into the vast world, and experience what for the ancient Greeks was the origin of all theosophy, all philosophy—when we experience ‘wonder’, from which we derive the German word meaning miracle; when we experience some premonition of those ‘ordeals of the soul’, and when we see what may well be the resolution of all wonder and the liberation from all ordeals which ‘revelations of the spirit’ can effect. What can be experienced from all these three—from the wonders of Nature, from the ordeals of the soul, from the redeeming revelations of the Spirit, this then is to be the subject of our forthcoming studies.

Erster Vortrag

Das erste Wort dieser diesjährigen Münchner Veranstaltungen wurde dem Götterboten Hermes übertragen, und wir dürfen gegenüber dem, was wir in unserer Geisteswissenschaft sehen wollen, was wir an ihr fühlen wollen, gerade diese Übertragung der Worte des Hermes vielleicht in einer sinnbildlichen Art auffassen. Ist uns ja Geisteswissenschaft nicht allein etwas, was uns Wissen oder Erkenntnis bringt ähnlich dem anderen Wissen, der anderen Erkenntnis der Welt, sondern ist sie uns doch ein wirklicher Vermittler in jene Welten hinauf, von denen nach der Anschauung des alten Griechenlands Hermes den Menschen herabgebracht hat, was in ihnen selbst die Kräfte entzünden konnte, die hinaufführen in diese Reiche des Übersinnlichen. Und anknüpfend an diese Worte sei es mir gerade heute in diesem einleitenden Vortrage gestattet, einiges hinzuzufügen zu dem, was uns aus den Darbietungen der letzten Tage ertönen konnte, so daß es sich mit allem Folgenden, in den nächsten Tagen zu Besprechenden, zu einem Ganzen zusammenschließen kann.

Diese Darbietungen sind ja nicht nur deswegen gegeben, um etwa eine Art Verschönerung unserer Veranstaltung zu bewirken, sondern sie sollen angesehen werden als im innigsten organischen Zusammenhang stehend gerade mit dem, was in dieser seit vielen Jahren bestehenden jährlichen Mittelpunktsunternehmung unseres hiesigen geisteswissenschaftlichen Wirkens steht. Es wurde in diesem Jahre möglich, diese Veranstaltung einzuleiten durch die Wiedererneuerung desjenigen Dramas, das geradezu am Ausgangspunkt aller Dramatik des Abendlandes überhaupt steht, desjenigen Dramas, das wir nur dann wirklich ins Auge fassen können, wenn wir den Blick noch über alles hinauswenden, was die durch die Geschichte überlieferte Dramatik als Kunst dem Abendlande gebracht hat. Und damit hängt es ja auch zusammen, daß dieses Drama eine würdige Einleitung gerade einer Unternehmung ist, die auf geisteswissenschaftlichem Boden steht. Denn es reicht dieses Drama hinauf in diejenigen Zeiten europäischer Kulturentwickelung, in welchen die einzelnen menschlichen Geistesströmungen, die uns heute als Wissenschaft, Religion und Kunst entgegentreten, noch nicht voneinander getrennt, sondern innig miteinander verbunden waren. Wir wenden damit unser Gefühl gewissermaßen zu Urzeiten der europäischen Kulturentwickelung hinauf, zu jenen Zeiten, als eine Einheitskultur, die unmittelbar aus dem tiefsten Geistesleben herausgeboren war, die menschlichen Seelen durchsprühte mit religiöser Erhebung zu dem Höchsten, was der Mensch überhaupt für seine ganze Seele erreichen kann, so daß in dieser Kultur unmittelbares religiöses Leben pulste. Und es darf gesagt werden: Diese Kultur war Religion. — Religion war nicht etwas, zu dem sich der Mensch als einem besonderen Zweige der Kultur erst hinwandte, sondern selbst wenn er von denjenigen Teilen des Geisteslebens sprach, die unmittelbar in die praktischen Zweige des Alltags eindringen, so sprach er doch von Religion, denn dieses Eindringen war Erhebung zur Religion, die ihre Strahlen über alles ausdehnte, was der Mensch erleben konnte.

Aber diese Religion war innerlich stark und gewaltig in ihren einzelnen Kräften, so daß sie nicht stehenblieb bei der allgemeinen Erhebung des religiösen Empfindens zu den großen Weltenmächten; diese Urreligion der Menschheit war so mächtig, daß sie die einzelnen Kräfte des menschlichen Geisteslebens inspirierte, so daß sie Formen annahmen, die unmittelbar Kunstformen waren. Es ergoß sich religiöses Leben in kühne Gestaltungen, und eins war Religion mit Kunst. Die Kunst war die unmittelbare Tochter der Religion, die im innigen Familienzusammenhang noch lebte mit ihrer Mutter, der Religion selber. Es gibt kein Gefühl von solcher religiöser Tiefe in unserer Zeit wie das, was alle beseelte, die teilnehmen durften an den alten Mysterien und hinblickten, wie sich ergoß das religiöse Leben in das, was künstlerisch den Menschen vor Augen gestellt wurde. Aber diese Urreligion mit ihrer Tochter, der Kunst, war zu gleicher Zeit so geläutert, so sehr in die Äthersphären des Geisteslebens hinaufgeläutert, daß, indem sie auf die menschlich Seele wirkte, aus ‚ dieser Seele heraus auch alles das kam, wovon wir heute einen schwachen, abstrakten Abglanz in Wissenschaft und Erkenntnis haben. Wenn das vertiefte Gefühl sich begeistern ließ von dem, was als Religion in die künstlerische Form sich ergoß, dann entzündete sich in der Seele das Wissen von den Göttern und den göttlichen Dingen, das Wissen von dem Geisterland. Und so war Wissen oder Erkenntnis die andere Tochter des religiösen Lebens, die ebenso noch in innigem Familienverband lebte, intim zusammen lebte mit der Urmutter aller Kultur, mit der religiösen Kultur.

Fragen wir heute unser Gefühl: Bis wie weit wollen wir es denn bringen mit dem, was wir gegenwärtig erst als einen schwachen Anfang geben können? Wozu wollen wir es denn eigentlich bringen? - Wir wollen es dazu bringen, wieder so etwas in der Menschheit zu entzünden wie die Vereinigung, die Harmonie zwischen Kunst und Wissenschaft. Denn nur dadurch kann der Blick der Menschenseele, befeuert von dem Gefühle, durchkraftet von dem Besten in unseren Willenskräften, jene Einheit ausgießen wollen über alle menschliche Bildung, welche ebenso den Menschen wieder in die göttlichen Höhen seines Daseins hinaufführen wird, wie sie eindringen wird in die alleralltäglichsten Handgriffe unseres Lebens. Und heilig wird alles das sein, was sonst nur profanes Leben ist und was erst dadurch zu diesem profanen Leben wurde, daß vergessen war sein Zusammenhang mit dem geistig-göttlichen Urquell alles Daseins.

So soll durch eine solche Unternehmung, wie wir sie in diesem Jahre pflegten, gerade auf dieses Gefühl hingedeutet werden, das uns beleben soll und muß, wenn wir mit der Geisteswissenschaft das meinen, was in die tiefsten Tiefen der menschlichen Seelengründe hineingehen soll. Damit sind die Gründe dargelegt, warum es im besten Sinne des Wortes geisteswissenschaftlich empfunden werden darf, gerade das Mysterium von Eleusis als eine Art von Sonne zu betrachten, deren Strahlen, in unser Herz sich ergießend, uns von dem, was eigentlich Geisteswissenschaft ist, die rechte Empfindung hervorrufen können.

Dasjenige, was man sonst als Dramatik kennt, was das Abendland als dramatische Kunst empfindet und was in Shakespeare seine Höhe erreicht hat, es ist ja eine Geistesströmung, die ausgegangen ist von dem alten Mysterium, eine Verweltlichung des alten Mysteriums. Wenn wir also zu den Urbeginnen der dramatischen Kunst gehen, so kommen wir eben zu dergleichen zurück, wie es das Mysterium von Eleusis ist. Habe ich damit im allgemeinen die Gedanken angedeutet, die schon vor Jahren uns beseelten, als wir beim Münchner Internationalen Theosophischen Kongreß gerade dieses Drama vorführten, so darf ich nun vielleicht auch einiges im speziellen erwähnen, das, weil ja das Alltägliche innig zusammenhängt — das Alltägliche jetzt im besten spirituellen Sinne gemeint mit dem, was uns als geistiges Ideal vorschwebt, das einiges Licht zu bringen geeignet ist auf unser Wollen, auf unsere Ziele. Erinnern durfte ich, als wir vor einiger Zeit darangingen, «Die Kinder des Luzifer» aufzuführen, daß mir selbst dazumal ein Gedanke vor die Seele trat, der für mich tief zusammenhängt mit unserer mitteleuropäischen geisteswissenschaftlichen Entwickelung in der Gegenwart. Als ich selber die Zeit für gekommen erachten durfte, mein geistiges Streben in Zusammenhang zu bringen mit dem, was Anthroposophie oder Geisteswissenschaft genannt werden darf, da war die Türe, durch welche ich versuchte, in die Anthroposophie hineinzuleiten, eine Besprechung, welche anknüpfte an dieses Drama «Die Kinder des Luzifer». Und dann ließen wir eine siebenjährige Entwickelungsperiode der von uns gedachten geisteswissenschaftlichen Arbeit verlaufen. Der Keim aber, der dazumal in unsere Seele gelegt wurde mit jenen Worten, die über die «Kinder des Luzifer» gesprochen waren, entwickelte sich mittlerweile in einer gesetzmäßigen siebenjährigen Epoche in unseren Herzen ganz im stillen. Und nach sieben Jahren waren wir so weit, das Drama «Die Kinder des Luzifer» als eine Einleitung unserer Münchner Unternehmungen darbieten zu können.

Ich darf in dieser heutigen Stunde, die einleitenden Worten zu meinen Vorträgen der nächsten Tage gewidmet sein soll, vielleicht diesen Gedanken anknüpfen an einen anderen, denn ich spreche vor Ihnen, meine lieben Freunde, aus dem vollsten Herzen heraus und zu gleicher Zeit aus der tiefsten Überzeugung meiner Seele heraus. Dasjenige, was als spirituelles Leben in der Zukunft immer mehr und mehr die Geister des Abendlandes ergreifen wird, das wird eine ganz besondere Form haben müssen. Man kann heute über Anthroposophie oder Geisteswissenschaft in der verschiedensten Weise denken. Die Menschen denken ja nicht immer nach den Notwendigkeiten des Daseins, nach den Kräften, die im Menschenwerden wirken, sondern sie denken aus ihrem Willen, aus ihren Empfindungen heraus, und dann kann der eine dies, der andere jenes als das richtige Ideal ansehen. So wird es viele anthroposophische Ideale geben, je nachdem die menschlichen Herzen geartet sind, je nachdem sie mit ihren Empfindungen und Gefühlen nach dieser oder jener Seite hinneigen. Wahrer Okkultismus in einer gewissen höheren Ausgestaltung läßt uns aber eine solche Hinneigung zu den Idealen noch immer als etwas erscheinen, was nur an unserer Persönlichkeit haftet, was doch noch so charakterisiert werden darf, daß man sagt: Solche Ideale sind eigentlich doch nur, was der eine oder der andere gerne als Anthroposophie sehen möchte, wovon er nach seinen besonderen Herzensempfindungen und nach der besonderen Konfiguration seines Intellekts glaubt, daß es eben das Beste ist. - Haben die Menschen doch auch über andere Dinge des Lebens nur jene Meinung, die aus solchen Herzensempfindungen, aus solchen persönlichen Motiven heraus entspringt. Geisteswissenschaft selbst muß aber dazu führen, das, was aus unseren persönlichen Herzensempfindungen heraus entspringt, gar nicht für etwas allgemein Maßgebendes anzusehen. Als Persönlichkeiten können wir immer irren, wie sehr wir auch glauben, daß wir einem selbstlosen Ideale huldigen. Eine Meinung über dasjenige, was geschehen soll im Menschenwerden, können wir uns erst dann bilden, wenn wir unsere persönlichen Meinungen über das Ideal ganz unterdrücken und wenn wir gar nicht mehr fragen, was wir selbst als die beste Art betrachten, die Geisteswissenschaft zu vertreten. Dann erst können wir zu einer wahren Meinung gelangen, wenn wir die Notwendigkeiten des Lebens sprechen lassen, ganz gleichgültig, wozu wir selber neigen - ob zu dieser oder jener Ausprägung des spirituellen Lebens, ob uns dieses oder jenes lieber ist, wenn wir uns fragen: Wie hat sich seit Jahrhunderten das europäische Kulturleben gestaltet, und was verlangt es für die nächste Zeit? Wenn wir uns diese Frage, ohne daß wir uns persönlich für die Antwort engagieren, vorlegen, dann erhalten wir eine zwiefache Antwort. Die eine, die große, die uns aus allem, was heute geschieht im geistigen Leben, überall hervorgeht: Das europäische Kulturleben verlangt, wenn es nicht verdorren und veröden soll, Geisteswissenschaft. — Die andere Antwort aber ist diese: Das europäische Kulturleben verlangt eine solche Geisteswissenschaft, welche den Grundbedingungen entspricht, die durch Jahrhunderte nicht in einem einzelnen von uns, sondern in der europäischen Menschheit geworden sind. - Eine Geisteswissenschaft aber, welche diesen Grundbedingungen des europäischen Kulturlebens entgegenkommt, können wir nur bringen, wenn wir uns selbstlos fragen: Was haben die Menschen seit Jahrhunderten in Europa fühlen und denken gelernt, und wie lechzt heute der Europäer nach geistiger Vertiefung seines Lebens?

Wenn wir uns diese Frage vorlegen, dann zeigen uns alle Zeichen der Zeit, daß es nicht die Fortsetzung unserer gewöhnlichen Mystik sein kann, wie wir sie seit Jahrtausenden kennen, wie sie seit Jahrtausenden so segensreich auf die verschiedenen Völker gewirkt hat. Die Fortsetzung dieser Mystik allein in dem Sinne, wie sie immer gewesen ist, wie sie von der Geschichte überliefert ist, würde nicht aufgenommen werden können von den Bedürfnissen des europäischen Kulturlebens. Wollten wir uns bloß in alte Mystik vertiefen, dann würden wir uns an diesem europäischen Kulturleben und allem, was damit zusammenhängt, versündigen, dann würden wir unsere persönlichen Neigungen über die Notwendigkeit des Daseins stellen. Unsere persönliche Neigung — möge sie auch zu irgendeiner Form alter Mystik neigen -, unterdrücken wir sie und fragen wir: Wessen bedürfen die Menschen nach den Bedingungen, wie sie sich entwickelt haben durch die Jahrhunderte? — Ebenso zeigen uns die Zeichen der Zeit, daß dasjenige, was wir gegenwärtiges wissenschaftliches Treiben nennen - in so hohem Ansehen es auch heute steht, eine so hohe Autorität es auch genießt -, in einem Zustande ist wie ein Baum, der eben abdorrt und nurmehr spärlichste Früchte für die Zukunft zeitigen kann. Ich weiß, daß damit ein gewisses «großes Wort», aber allerdings nicht «gelassen» ausgesprochen wird, wenn gesagt wird: Das, was heute im Umkreis des europäischen Lebens die äußere Wissenschaft genannt wird, ist ein verdorrender Zweig am Geisteshimmel der Menschheit. — Sie hat ihre Dienste geleistet, sie wird dadurch nicht erniedrigt, daß man in ihre Daseinsbedingungen so hineinleuchtet, wie es jetzt mit einigen Worten gesagt worden ist.

Weder alte Mystik noch neue Wissenschaft wird die Menschheit der Zukunft brauchen können, wenn sich die tiefsten Bedürfnisse geltend machen werden, die ein Band herstellen wollen zwischen menschlicher Seele und geistigen Offenbarungen. Das stand wie mit goldenen Lettern geschrieben vor dem Ideale, das damals uns vorschwebte, als wir vor Jahren begannen, das spirituelle Leben in einem breiteren Maße zu entwickeln. Und wenn ich jetzt jenes Wort aussprechen darf, von dem ich sagte, daß es mir ebensosehr ein Herzenswort wie ein Überzeugungswort ist, so möchte ich ganz objektiv und sachlich betrachtet im Sinne der Frage, die ich eben aufgeworfen habe - sagen: Der bedeutsamste literarische Anfang mit jener Art geistigen Lebens, das die europäische Menschheit der Zukunft im weitesten Umfange brauchen wird, das mitten darin steht zwischen der bloß historischen Mystik, die irgendwo aufgelesen wird aus historischen Urkunden, und der Wissenschaft, die ein verdorrender Zweig der Menschheitskultur ist —, der bedeutsamste Anfang in wahrhaft anthroposophischem Sinn, der das unmittelbare Leben betrachtet, wie es jetzt langsam als geistiges Leben rieselt, wie es sich weiter verbreiten wird, sind «Die großen Eingeweihten» unseres verehrten Edouard Schuré. Ich durfte schon am Beginne meines Münchner Kursus im vorigen Jahre darauf hinweisen: Wer ein wenig den Blick zu richten weiß in die Zukunft, nach dem, was diese Zukunft von uns fordern wird, der weiß, daß damit jene goldene Mittelstraße zwischen alter Mystik und moderner, aber eben verdorrender Wissenschaft für das literarische Leben eingeschlagen worden ist und daß der schöne, der bedeutungsvolle Anfang, der jetzt schon für alle europäischen Völker mit «Les grands Inities», den «Großen Eingeweihten», gemacht worden ist, sich immer weiter und weiter gestalten wird und daß damit eine Farbennuance charakterisiert ist, die nicht deshalb auf uns einen sympathischen Eindruck macht, weil wir aus unseren persönlichen Neigungen gerade dieses oder jenes wollen, sondern weil wir schauen, wie die immer mehr sich geltend machenden europäischen Kulturbedingungen herausforderten aus ihren geistigen Bedingungen heraus, daß ein solcher literarischer Anfang gemacht werde. Wenn Sie dieses Werk kennen, meine lieben Freunde, dann wissen Sie zugleich, in welch bedeutungsvoller Weise dort hingewiesen ist auf das, was dann weiter ausgestaltet ist in den «Heiligtümern des Orients» von Edouard Schur&, wie in bedeutungsvoller Art hingewiesen ist auf das Mysterium von Eleusis. Was kann uns dieser Hinweis in den «Großen Eingeweihten» in wahrhaft anthroposophischem Sinn und diese Neuschöpfung des Mysteriums von Eleusis für Gedanken in der Seele anregen?

Nun, meine lieben Freunde, wenn wir hinaufschauen in die Urbeginne des europäischen Kunst- und Geisteslebens, dann stehen zwei Figuren gleichsam am Ausgangspunkt, die eine tiefe Bedeutung für wahrhaft spirituelle Erfassung des ganzen neuzeitlichen Geisteslebens haben, die zunächst uns wie sinnbildliche Darstellungen großer geistiger Impulse erscheinen. Diese zwei Figuren, die für denjenigen, der einen tieferen Blick tut in das gegenwärtige Geistesleben, wie Lichtstrahlen hereinfallen, die Bedeutungsvollstes verkündigen, sind Persephone und Iphigenia. Wir berühren, wenn wir diese beiden Namen aussprechen, wesentlich in gewisser Beziehung zwei Seelen unseres modernen Menschen, jene zwei Seelen, deren Vereinigung die tiefsten Seelenprüfungen dieses Menschen herausfordert. Wir werden es noch genauer sehen in den nächsten Tagen, wie Persephone in unserem Herzen den Gedanken an jenen Impuls anregt, den wir nun in unseren geisteswissenschaftlichen Auseinandersetzungen hier schon öfter berühren durften. Es war einstmals der ganzen Menschheit beschieden, in anderer Art zu ihren Erkenntnissen zu kommen als heute. Wir wissen aus diesen geisteswissenschaftlichen Vorträgen von einem alten Hellsehen der Menschheit, das aus der menschlichen Natur in uralten Zeiten wie selbstverständlich heraussprudelte, so daß, wie Hunger und Durst und Atembedürfnis, aus dieser menschlichen Seele sich die hellseherischen Bilder herausgestalteten, in welche sich die Geheimnisse der geistigen Welten hineinergossen. Das ist etwas, was der Mensch einmal als Gabe uralten Hellsehens besaß und was dem Menschen gleichsam geraubt ist von dem, was später im menschlichen Leben Erkenntnis wurde. Teils fühlend, daß gerade in seiner Zeit dieser Raub des alten Hellsehens durch moderne Erkenntnis sich vollzog, teils voraussehend, wie das in künftigen Zeiten, die jetzt die unsrigen sind, immer mehr und mehr geschehen sollte, wandte der alte Grieche seinen Seelenblick hinauf zu derjenigen Göttergestalt, welche die Kräfte, die zu jenem alten Hellsehen führten, in der menschlichen Seele loslöste aus der unmittelbaren elementarischen Natur heraus. Er sah zu jener Göttin auf, die die Regentin des alten an die menschliche Natur gebundenen Hellsehens war, und nannte sie Persephone. Und dann sagte sich der alte Grieche: An die Stelle der alten Seherkultur wird immer mehr und mehr eine andere treten, die von Menschen dirigiert wird, von Menschen geboren wird, denen das alte Hellsehen schon verlorengegangen ist. - In derjenigen Kultur, die der alte Grieche anknüpfte an die Namen Agamemnon, Odysseus, Menelaos, ist das gegeben, was wir heute als unsere äußere, nicht mehr von hellseherischen Kräften berührte geistige Kultur erkennen.

Heute fühlen es die Menschen im weiteren Umkreise nicht mehr, daß diese Kultur, die ein Wissen erzeugt, das ebenso benutzt werden soll, die Geheimnisse des Daseins philosophisch zu ergründen, wie es auf der anderen Seite Kanonen baut durch die Kenntnisse der Naturgesetze, daß in einem tieferen Sinn diese Art der Geisteskultur Opfer fordert, die der Mensch erbringen muß den höheren geistigen Wesenheiten gegenüber, die die übersinnlichen Welten lenken. Diese Opfer werden auch gebracht, nur merken es die Menschen heute nicht, weil sie auf diese Dinge noch nicht acht haben. Der alte Grieche merkte es, daß diese moderne Kultur, die er zurückführte auf die Namen Agamemnon, Menelaos, Odysseus, Opfer forderte, daß sie jene Tochter des menschlichen Geistes ist, die in einer gewissen Weise immer wieder und wieder geopfert werden muß. Und der alte Grieche stellte dieses immerwährende Opfer der intellektuellen Kultur in der Opferung der Tochter des Agamemnon, in Iphigenia dar. So klingt uns eine wundersame Antwort auf die Frage, die uns aus den Iphigenien-Opfern gestellt wird. Wenn es nur jene äußere Kultur geben würde, welche zurückgeführt werden kann im wahren Sinn des alten Griechen auf die Namen Agamemnon, Menelaos, Odysseus, dann wäre die Menschheit unter dem Einflusse dieser Kultur längst in ihren Herzen, in ihren tiefsten Seelenkräften verdorrt. Nur dadurch, daß die Menschheit sich das Gefühl bewahrte, immer wieder und wieder Opfer zu bringen und herauszuschälen aus dieser allgemeinen intellektuellen Kultur jene Kultur, die man in einem tieferen, nicht im oberflächlichen Sinne eine Priesterkultur nennen kann, ist diese Kultur vor dem Verdorren bewahrt geblieben. Gleichwie Iphigenia der Artemis als Opfer dargebracht wurde, aber durch dieses Opfer zur Priesterin ward, so mußten immerzu in den verflossenen Jahrhunderten und Jahrtausenden gewisse Elemente unserer intellektuellen Kultur geläutert und gereinigt, mit einem priesterlich-religiösen Charakter den höheren Göttern dargebracht werden, damit diese äußere intellektuelle Kultur die Menschheit in ihren Herzen, in ihren Seelen nicht verdorre. So stellt uns Persephone dar die Lenkerin und Leiterin der alten hellseherischen Kultur, so stellt uns Iphigenia dar die Repräsentantin des immerwährenden Opfers, welches unsere äußere Intellektualität an das tiefere religiöse Leben zu bringen hat.

Die Dinge, die ich eben jetzt ausgesprochen habe, sind immerdar lebendig gewesen in dem ganzen Strome europäischen Kulturlebens vom alten Griechenland herauf bis in die modernsten Zeiten herein; sie haben immerzu gelebt von jenen Zeiten an, als Sokrates zuerst das reine wissenschaftliche Denken von der alten Einheitskultur loslöste, bis in die Zeit herein, da der arme Nietzsche an der Trennung der drei Zweige der gesamten Kultur, Wissenschaft, Religion und Kunst, in Schmerzen seiner Seele sich wand und an dieser Trennung zugrunde ging. Die neuere Zeit mußte, weil schon hereinwirken die Kräfte, die die Vereinigung dessen wieder bewirken sollen, was durch Jahrtausende getrennt gehen mußte, und weil aus der Zukunft schon die Forderungen für die Gegenwart hereinleuchten, wieder anknüpfen in ihren Repräsentanten, die von den Zeitengeistern inspiriert sind, an jene beiden Impulse, die soeben charakterisiert worden sind: an die Namen Iphigenia und Persephone. Und derjenige, der solches überblickt, fühlt noch in einem viel tieferen Grunde, was es für eine Tat war, als, sich voll versenkend in altes Griechenleben, Goethe das, was er selbst als den Gipfel seiner Kunst empfand, in dem Symbolum der Iphigenia darstellte. Oh, mit dieser Tat Goethes, in der in einer gewissen Weise sinnbildlich alles Wirken Goethes zum Ausdruck kommt, mit der «Iphigenie», ist die erste Anknüpfung gegeben an uraltes europäisches Geistesgut. Und im Geheimsten klingt uns aus jener Tat Goethes heute entgegen: Wir müssen uns wiederum erinnern an das immerwährende Opfer, welches die intellektuelle Kultur der religiösen Kultur bringen muß, wenn die Intellektualität die europäische Menschheit nicht veröden soll.

Rauh für höheres Geistesleben wie der König Thoas in der «Iphigenie» ist in gewisser Weise dasjenige, was die intellektuelle Kultur im weiteren Umfange leistet. Milde und harmonisch, um nicht mitzuhassen im Menschheitsleben, sondern mitzulieben, ist dasjenige, was uns in dem Symbolum der Iphigenia entgegentritt. Und so war die erste Erinnerung an bedeutsamste Impulse des europäischen Geisteslebens in dem Augenblick gegeben, da Goethe sein Herz mit der Inspiration durchdrang, die Iphigenia als das Zeugnis des immerwährenden Opfers der Intellektualität vor die europäische Menschheit hinzustellen. So kann man das Hereinleuchten der geistigen Inspiratoren der neueren Zeit in Goethes Seele empfinden.

Eine zweite Erinnerung ward notwendig, auf die etwas länger gewartet werden mußte, jene Erinnerung, die hinzielt auf jene Zeiten, in denen noch rege war die alte hellseherische Kultur, die anknüpfte an den Namen Persephone. Und man fühlt an derjenigen Stelle, wo sich zu einem gewissen Höhepunkt die «Großen Eingeweibten» erheben, in dem Hinweis auf das Mysterium von Eleusis, wie europäisches Geistesleben mit seinen Inspiratoren da arbeitet, um hervorzuzaubern aus dem Dämmerdunkel der Zeiten, was immer mehr und mehr führen muß zu der Erkenntnis, daß in einer neuen Form die alte, in dem Namen Persephone repräsentierte, hellseherische Kultur wieder aufleuchten muß. Ein Pol im europäischen Geistesleben der Neuzeit war gegeben mit der Wiedererneuerung der alten griechischen Iphigeniengestalt, der andere Pol ist gegeben mit der Neuschöpfung des Mysteriums von Eleusis durch Edouard Schuré. Und wir müssen es als einen der besten Sterne, die da walten über unserem Streben, betrachten, daß wir diese Inauguration leuchten lassen konnten gerade auf unser anthroposophisches Leben in Gegenwart des Neuschöpfers des Mysteriums von Eleusis, der uns mit seiner Gegenwart jetzt schon durch mehrere Jahre unseres mitteleuropäischen Geisteslebens beglückt hat.

Ich sagte: Das, was ich eben gesprochen habe, ist nur nach der einen Seite hin ein Herzensgedanke; nach der anderen Seite hin ist es ein Gedanke, der ganz der objektivsten, nüchternsten Überzeugung entspringt. Und daß ich ihn heute ausgesprochen habe, rührt daher, daß ich es halten muß mit dem Goetheschen Worte, das wie eine wundersame Weisheitsperle hereinklingt in unser Erkenntnisleben: Nur das ist wahr, was fruchtbar sich erweist. Und wenn in dem, was wir treiben durften seit Jahren, einiges von Fruchtbarkeit bemerkt wird, so darf auch anerkannt werden, daß der Gedanke, der dieses unser Wirken seit vielen Jahren beseelte, der immer wie ein geheimer Gast, wie ein geheimer Mitkämpfer vorhanden war, sich eben durch seine Fruchtbarkeit als wahr erwiesen hat. Auf alles das, was sich nun an dieser Stelle anschließen würde an die Gedanken, die eben geäußert worden sind über die Namen Iphigenia und Persephone, werden wir ja bei der Besprechung der Naturwunder, der Seelenprüfungen und Geistesoffenbarungen — wie illustrierend - in der mannigfaltigsten Weise in den nächsten Tagen zurückkommen. Nur sei noch erwähnt, daß ebenso wie Iphigenia die Tochter Agamemnons ist, der zu denjenigen Heroen gehört, auf welche das alte Griechenland die Pflege der Intellektualität im weitesten Umfang mit all seiner praktischen und auch kriegerischen Gestaltung zurückführt, daß ebenso Persephone die Tochter der Demeter ist. Nun, wir werden sehen, wie die Demeter die Regentin ist der größten Naturwunder, eine Urgestalt des menschlichen Fühlens, Denkens und Wollens, deren wahrhaftiges Kind Persephone ist. Jene Urgestalt, die auf Zeiten hinweist, in denen das menschliche Gehirnleben noch nicht getrennt war von dem allgemeinen Leibesleben, in denen sozusagen Ernährung durch die äußeren Stoffe und Denken durch das Instrument des Gehirns nicht getrennte menschliche Verrichtungen waren. Da fühlte man noch, wie der Gedanke da draußen lebt, wenn die Saat auf den Feldern gedeiht, wie die Hoffnung wirklich da draußen sich ausbreitet über die Felder und durchdringt das Naturwunderwirken gleich dem Gesang der Lerche. Man fühlte noch, daß hereinzieht mit dem materiellen das geistige Leben, untertaucht in den menschlichen Leib, sich läutert, zum Geist wird als die Urmutter, aus welcher elementar herausgeboren wird Persephone in der menschlichen Wesenheit selber. In jene Urzeiten der Menschheitsentwickelung, in denen die menschliche Natur noch so einheitlich wirkte, daß alles leibliche Leben zugleich ein geistiges war, daß alles leibliche Verarbeiten innig vereint war mit dem geistigen Verarbeiten des Gedankens, weist uns der Name Demeter hinauf. Und wie es da ausgeschaut hat, das kann uns heute nur der Blick in die Akasha-Chronik lehren. Daß die Persephone die wirkliche Tochter der Demeter war, das lehrt uns eben dieser Einblick in die Akasha-Chronik. Und ebenso wird sich ergeben, daß in jener Gestalt, die sogleich in der Neuschöpfung des Mysteriums von Eleusis auftritt, in Eros, in der Tat nach alter griechischer Empfindung dasjenige gegeben ist, wodurch die Kräfte der Demeter in der sich allmählich entwickelnden Menschheit zu dem geworden sind, was sie heute sind. So ist aber das ganze Wunder der menschlichen Natur sogleich vor unsere Seele hingezaubert, wenn Demeter vor uns steht mit der ernsten Mahnung einer Urgewalt, die zauberhaft hindurchzieht urewig durch alles menschliche Fühlen. Wenn Demeter vor uns steht, da steht etwas vor uns, was durch die Ewigkeiten der Zeiten als ein Impuls der menschlichen Natur spricht. Das fühlen wir herunterströmen von der Bühne, wenn Demeter vor uns steht, der größte Repräsentant jener Urgewalt, die wir heute nur mit dem abstrakten Namen der menschlichen Keuschheit bezeichnen, mit all ihrer fruchtbaren Wirklichkeit, wo sie nicht Askese ist, wo sie einschließt die Urliebe der Menschheit zugleich. Auf der anderen Seite, was spricht uns aus Eros? Die knospenhafte unschuldige Liebe. Ihr Regent ist Eros, so empfanden die Griechen.

Nun entwickelt sich das Drama. Und welche Kräfte wirken mit belebender tragischer Kraft von Anfang durch das ganze Drama hindurch? Das Wechselspiel der Keuschheit, die zugleich Urliebe mit ihrer Fruchtbarkeit ist, und die unschuldige, noch knospenhafte Liebe, das waltet in dem Drama, wie draußen in den trivialen Naturwundern positive und negative Elektrizität waltet. So kann durch den Raum, in den hineingegossen wird dieses bedeutsame menschliche Urdrama, etwas von mehr oder weniger unbewußter oder bewußßtter Empfindung fließen gegenüber Kräften, die aus den Urzeiten der Menschheit heraufwirken und sich durch unser modernes Leben hindurchziehen. Nur daß - und hier deute ich wiederum auf etwas hin, was in den folgenden Tagen weiter ausgeführt wird - in gewisser Weise jene Urströmungen, die Demeterströmung und die Erosströmung, immer mehr und mehr aufgenommen werden in der menschlichen Zukunft von jenen Strömungen, die angedeutet werden sollten in den drei Gestalten Luna, Astrid, Philia. Ein lebendiger Zusammenhang soll sich vor unsere Seele hinstellen zwischen den Strömungen, die jene des Menschenursprungs sind: Demeter, Eros, und dem, was dazwischensteht, Persephone einerseits - und auf der anderen Seite dem, was heute hereindämmert in einer noch nicht persönlich gestalteten Form. Es ist wie ein geistiges Gewissen, das noch aus dem Unbestimmten hereintönt und heute noch nicht auf die Bühne darf. Es ist nur eine Stimme von außen, und es sind die drei Gestalten, als wirkliche Töchter der Demeter: Luna, Philia, Astrid.

Ich habe Ihnen die Empfindungen zu charakterisieren versucht, aus denen heraus das Mysterium von Eleusis in seiner Neuschöpfung von Edouard Schure an den Ausgangspunkt unserer geisteswissenschaftlichen Betrachtungen gestellt worden ist. Sie, meine lieben Freunde, werden ja wohl durch alles das, was in diesen Jahren vorangegangen ist, mit jenem Blick unsere heutigen Ausführungen über dies so bedeutende Werk betrachten, der so natürlich sein sollte für alle, die innerhalb unserer anthroposophischen Strömung stehen. Was fordert denn dieser Blick von uns? Nun, es ist heute ungeheuer leicht, wahrhaft kinderleicht, in Anknüpfung an das, was dramatische Kunst draußen in der Welt bietet, uns die Fehler und vielleicht auch die Dilettantismen vorzurechnen, die wir alle machen, wenn wir mit unseren schwachen Kräften an ein so bedeutungsvolles Werk, wie es das «Mysterium von Eleusis» ist, gehen. Es kommt uns aber gar nicht darauf an, oder besser gesagt, es darf uns nicht darauf ankommen, in derselben Weise zu charakterisieren, wie draußen auf unseren gegenwärtigen Bühnen charakterisiert, dargestellt wird. Diejenigen aber, die heute schon etwas empfinden von dem, was wir durch die Einprägung der Eigenart der Geist-Erkenntnis in die Kunst bewirken sollen, die werden wissen, daß es uns eben auf etwas ganz anderes ankommt. Sie werden auch wissen, daß alles das, was eine gewisse Vollkommenbheit erst in der Zukunft erreichen kann, unvollkommen in der Gegenwart auftreten muß. Unser Beruf ist es nicht, zu konkurrieren mit äußeren Bühnenleistungen. Wir denken gar nicht daran, in irgendeiner Weise ein gleiches zu tun, und schon der bloße Vergleich mit äußeren sonstigen Bühnenleistungen ist ein Irrtum. Mag ein Kunsturteil in bezug auf das, was heute in äußeren Bühnendarstellungen gefordert wird, sagen, was immer es will, es ist ein Dilettantismus in bezug auf das, was Geisteswissenschaft wirklich will, wollen muß, auch in bezug auf die Kunst.

Und diejenigen von Ihnen, welche so fühlen mit mir, die so teilen können jenes tiefe Dankbarkeitsgefühl, das ich jedesmal am Ausgangspunkt unserer Münchner Unternehmungen gegenüber all denen empfinde, die hilfreich sind bei diesen Unternehmungen, jene Freunde unter Ihnen, die das fühlen, werden es nicht als unsachlich betrachten, nicht als irgend etwas Persönliches, wenn ich auch in diesem Jahre wieder dieses tiefsten Dankgefühles am Schlusse dieser meiner einleitenden Betrachtung gedenke. Es gehören nicht nur viele Hände dazu, diese Unternehmungen möglich zu machen, sondern es gehören dazu Seelen, welche wirklich sich schon durchdrungen haben mit dem, was die schönste Frucht des geistig-strebenden Lebens sein kann und was ich nennen möchte die geistige Wärme. Und es bleibt ja diese geistige Wärme wirklich niemals ohne ihre Folgen, niemals ohne ein sich allmählich entwikkelndes Können für das, was man will auf dem entsprechenden Felde. Und so stehen wir jedesmal da, wenn wir darangehen, zunächst als das kleine Häuflein derer, die hier in München Vorläufer sind der größeren Gemeinschaft, die sich dann zusammenfindet, durchdrungen von spiritueller Wärme, und wir haben den Glauben in unserem Wirken, auch wenn es anfangs recht holperig mit allem geht: es muß gehen. Und es geht bis zu dem Grade, den wir eben erreichen können. Wir finden immer bei dieser Unternehmung den Realitätenbeweis, daß geistige Kräfte durch die Welt walten, daß sie uns helfen, daß wir uns ihnen überlassen können. Und wenn es uns manchmal scheinen wollte, als ob es nicht ginge, dann sagen wir uns, daß, wenn es nicht gehen würde, es im Sinne der Kräfte läge, die hinter unserem Wirken stehen. Und dann wäre es recht, daß es nicht ginge. Und so handeln wir, und so denken wir gar nicht an das, was zuletzt als Vorstellung herauskommen soll. Wir denken an die geistigen Kräfte, denen wir im Sinne unserer Zeit auch ein schwaches, kleines Opfer bringen wollen, das Opfer der gegenwärtigen Intellektualität an die religiöse Vertiefung des Menschenherzens. Und es ist schön, zu sehen, wie tatsächlich diese spirituelle Wärme bei jenem kleinen Häuflein in wunderbarer Weise vorhanden ist, wie jeder einzelne tatsächlich Geistiges erlebt, indem er die keineswegs leichte Opferarbeit unternimmt. Es ist eine Bruderarbeit, die uns die anderen, die da mitwirken, leisten; und wer mich in diesen Worten versteht, wird mit mir die Dankgefühle empfinden, denen ich eben in diesem Augenblick Ausdruck verleihen will.

Es geht natürlich unser erster Dank an den Neuschöpfer des «Mysteriums von Eleusis», es gehen aber dann die mannigfaltigsten Dankgefühle an meine Mitarbeiter in dieser Münchner Zeit. Da darf ich vor allen Dingen gedenken derer, die sich durch ihre von solch liebevoller spiritueller Wärme im Dienste der Geisteswissenschaft durchzogenen Leistungen durch viele Jahre hindurch berufen gemacht haben, heute ihr schönes, ihr warmes Können mit dem, was wir hier wollen, zu vereinen. Da lassen Sie mich zunächst den tiefen Herzenswunsch befriedigen, hinzuweisen auf jene beiden Persönlichkeiten, die da in einer ganz besonderen Weise mitwirkten, so daß heute schon die schönste Einheit ihres spirituellen Denkens und ihrer rein technischen Arbeit bei unserer Münchner Unternehmung uns überall entgegenstrahlt: auf Fräulein Stinde und Gräfin Kalckreuth. Lassen Sie mich hinweisen auf unseren lieben Freund Adolf Arenson, welcher den musikalischen Teil wie in den vorigen Jahren so auch in diesem Jahre für alle drei Vormittage geleistet hat. Zu beurteilen diese Leistungen überlasse ich Ihren eigenen Herzen, Ihren eigenen Seelen. Ich selbst empfinde es als ein besonders gutes Geschick, daß gerade in dieser Weise der musikalische Teil unserer Leistungen von unserem lieben Freund Arenson zu unserer Gesamtarbeit beigesteuert wird. Und ich empfinde es weiter als ein besonders günstiges Geschick, daß das, was mir vorschwebte als ein von wirklich religiösem Geiste durchhauchtes Bühnenbild, daß das von unserem lieben Fräulein von Eckhardtstein in einer so ausgezeichneten Weise geleistet werden kann. Mir, meine lieben Freunde, ist jeder rote und blaue Fleck, ist jeder Glanz und jeder matte Ton in dem Bühnenbilde wichtig und bedeutungsvoll, und daß das von der bezeichneten Persönlichkeit gefühlt wird, gehört zu dem, was wir als wirklich geistgetragene Arbeit empfinden müssen. Und ich brauche Sie ja nur hinzuweisen auf alles das, was Ihnen entgegengetreten ist im weiteren Umkreis in den Bühnenbildern, die unsere Maler Herr Linde, Herr Volckert und Herr Haß beisteuern zu unseren dramatischen Inaugurationen; und ich darf dann durch diesen Hinweis in Ihnen den Gedanken anregen, wie in den Seelen dieser Persönlichkeiten sich der spirituelle Gedanke so ergossen hat, daß er wirklich bis in den Pinsel hinein seine Kraft behält. Es ist Spiritualität, was Sie in dem Bühnenbild sehen, wie es die drei Genannten beisteuern. In alledem, was hier erwähnt wird, erblicken wir natürlich nicht ein Vollendetes, sondern etwas, was der Anfang eines Wollens ist, und wir möchten nun gerne, daß man durch alles das, was gewollt wird, was nicht jetzt schon geleistet werden kann, ersieht, wie man sich die Fortgestaltung der Kunst denken kann. Deshalb ist es uns von so unendlicher Wichtigkeit, daß auch die innere dramatische Gestaltung nur in den Händen von Darstellern liegt, die nach geistiger Erkenntnis streben, denn ich möchte - nicht aus persönlicher Neigung, sondern deshalb, weil ich muß - nicht ein einziges Wort in diesen unseren dramatischen Unternehmungen auf der Bühne gesprochen wissen von einem Andersgesinnten, und wenn dieses Wort auch mit der höchsten künstlerischen Vollendung und mit dem äußersten künstlerischen Raffinement der gegenwärtigen sprachlichen Bühnentechnik gesprochen würde. Denn etwas ganz anderes wird gewollt als diese äußere Bühnentechnik. Das, was heute Kunst genannt wird, wird nicht gewollt. Gewollt aber wird, daß in jeder Seele, die da oben steht und mitwirkt, das Herz aus spiritueller Wärme heraus spricht, daß ein solcher Hauch durch die ganze mehr oder weniger gute Darstellung geht, daß wir Geisteswärme als Kunst, Kunst als Geisteswärme erleben. Deshalb müßte jeder, der teilnimmt an diesen unseren Inaugurationsunternehmungen des Münchner Zyklus, die Empfindung haben: es gibt da kein Wort, das nicht, indem es gesprochen wird, zugleich in tiefster Seele von dem Darsteller mitempfunden wird. Das bewirkt in mancher Hinsicht jene künstlerische Keuschheit, die derjenige, der nicht spirituell fühlen will, als Dilettantismus empfinden mag, die aber der Anfang ist von etwas, was da kommen soll, der Anfang von etwas, was man einstmals als künstlerische Wahrheit in tiefstem, in geistigstem Sinne des Wortes empfinden wird, so unvollkommen und anfänglich es Ihnen auch heute entgegentreten mag. Deshalb wird niemals daran gedacht werden, meine lieben Freunde, Ihnen, die Sie ja das Verständnis haben, etwa mit dramatischen Strichen zu kommen. Sie werden ruhig aushalten alle Längen, die einmal die Sache notwendig macht. Uns ist nichts zu lang, uns ist nichts zu undramatisch in dem gewöhnlichen heutigen Sinne, weil wir uns nicht nach äußeren dramatischen Forderungen, weil wir uns nach den inneren Notwendigkeiten der Sache richten, und wir werden niemals unsere dramatischen Überzeugungen verleugnen. Nehmen wir zum Beispiel das Märchen, das Felicia im fünften Bilde der «Prüfung der Seele» Capesius erzählt, so würde der gewöhnliche Theaterbesucher sagen: Das ist zum Sterben langweilig. — Diese Langweiligkeit auf die Bühne zu bringen, werden wir uns niemals scheuen, wenn es die dramatische Wahrheit im spirituellen Sinne von uns fordert. Und die dramatische Freiheit fordert, daß eine jede Individualität, die uns die Liebe erweist, mitzuwirken, an ihrem Ort in freier Weise walten kann, so daß jeder das, was er tut und spricht auf der Bühne, als sein eigenes von ihm ausgehendes Wort und Gefühl empfinden kann. Eine tyrannische Regie, wie sie neuerlich vielfach geliebt wird, werden Sie nicht walten sehen in unserer Unternehmung. Sie werden dafür, wenn auch nur anfänglich und unvollkommen, jenen Geist walten sehen, der sich unsichtbar wie ein Hauch ausbreitet über die Unternehmung als Einheit, dafür aber als Vielheit in jeder einzelnen Seele wirken kann. Deshalb empfindet man vor allen Dingen, wenn man mittendrinnen steht in einer solchen Unternehmung, jene tiefe Dankbarkeit gegenüber dem, was alle einzelnen Darsteller als Opfer brachten. Ihnen allen gegenüber, von Fräulein von Sivers an bis zu denen, die auch kleinere Rollen hatten, muß dieses Dankgefühl hier erwähnt werden. Sie einzeln aufzuzählen ist ja nicht möglich, weil so viele ihre Hilfe geboten haben. Aber alle haben viel geleistet. Ich brauche nur hinzuweisen auf denjenigen, welcher in hingebungsvoller Art sich einer diesjährigen Hauptrolle gewidmet hat, einer Rolle, die mir besonders ans Herz gewachsen ist und die sehr schwierig ist, weil sie innere große Schwierigkeiten bietet: ich meine die CapesiusRolle, die von unserem lieben Herrn Doser dargestellt wurde. Ich brauche nur hinzuweisen, in welch opferwilliger Weise unser lieber Herr Seiling sich jetzt schon beide Jahre der Darstellung jener Wesenheit gewidmet hat, die ich nennen möchte das dramatische Gewissen, das heute noch nicht auf die Bühne darf, das seine Lebendigkeit erweisen kann dadurch, daß es nicht in Person auf der Bühne auftritt, und wie derselbe Herr Seiling im vorigen und in diesem Jahre die Strader-Rolle mit großer Meisterschaft vor uns hingestellt hat. Solche Leistungen wie das, was das vierte Bild am dritten Tag geboten hat in jenem dramatischen Dialog zwischen Capesius und Strader, geben schon unserer Seele etwas von dem, was werden wird, wenn Kunst von Geist-Erkenntnis wie von ihrem Lebensblut durchpulst und Geist-Erkenntnis von Kunst wie von ihrer Körperlichkeit einmal gestaltet werden wird. Daher mußte ich so tiefen Dank empfinden, als dieser schöne Punkt dramatischer Leistung im vierten Bilde vor unsere Augen trat.

Und jetzt könnte ich diese Dankesbetrachtung vielfach fortsetzen. Ich könnte zuletzt Ihnen selber danken, allen, die Sie Verständnis erwiesen haben in Ihrer Seele für das, was einmal notwendig wird in einer künftigen Dramatik, daß das Unsichtbare neben dem Sichtbaren waltet, daß die Andeutung einhergehen darf neben der gröberen äußeren Darstellung, daß Gestalten hinausgestellt werden müssen, ich möchte sagen, in günstigere Rampenbeleuchtung, und anderes, was mehr hineingeheimnißt werden muß in das Tiefste des Menschenwortes. Was gemeint ist und was man mehr und mehr empfinden wird als wahre Meinung in den drei Gestalten Philia, Astrid, Luna, das kann nur von einer Seite aus in der Beleuchtung gegeben werden, in der es uns eben entgegentritt, in den drei Gestalten, wenn sie leibhaftig auf die Bühne treten. Aber mit diesen drei Gestalten, in denen wichtige Impulse der Menschheitsentwickelung gemeint sind, sind auch intime Seelengeheimnisse angeschlagen, mit denen man nur zurechtkommt, wenn man verbindet, was auf der einen Seite in scharfe aufdringliche Rampenbeleuchtung gedrängt wird und auf der anderen Seite angedeutet ist in den drei Frauengestalten durch die Intimität des Wortes. Diese drei Frauengestalten, die im Mondensilberlichte wirken und aus den vergänglichen Gestaltungen des Wassertropfenwesens jenes Kelchgefäß formen, das ein intimer Repräsentant ist für das, was sie in ihrer offenbareren und in ihrer intimeren Beleuchtung wollen diese Gestalten, die uns im Mondensilberlicht des Märchens entgegentreten und uns zeigen, wie sie die Menschenseelen begleiten als die intimen Freunde unserer Seele, wie sie sich gestalten in den Kindertagen und wie sie sich gestalten, wenn dreimal dreihundertsechzig Wochen verlaufen sind, sind nur zu verstehen, wenn man auf beides eingeht: auf das, was den Sinn gefangennimmt und äußerlich offenbar in gröberer Art auf die Bühne gestellt ist, und das, was den modernen Theaterbesuchern so langweilig sein würde, die Erzählung eines intimen Märchens, was aber einzig und allein jene Intimität geben kann, die in solchen drei Gestalten liegt wie Luna, Astrid, Philia. Und wenn man sieht, daß es heute schon eine Anzahl von Seelen gibt, die unbefangen und rein fühlen können gegenüber dem, was sonst nicht leicht auf der Bühne vergeben wird, dann kann man sagen, den Tiefen dieser Seelen, Ihnen allen, ist die Geisteswissenschaft dankbar, daß Sie lenken und leiten wollten Ihre Seelen, um mitzuempfinden, aufzunehmen, was im Dienste der Geist-Erkenntnis hiermit gewollt wird. Aus alledem heraus werden Sie es als etwas Objektives betrachten, wenn am Ende dieser Einleitung zu unseren kommenden Betrachtungen gerade eben diesen Dank-Gefühlen Ausdruck gegeben wird. Und eine dankbare Freude empfinde ich immer wieder, wenn ich nicht nur unsere lieben Mitarbeiter zusammenwirken und in das Neue sich hineinfügen sehe, wie sich zum Beispiel unser lieber Herr Mercklein hineinfand in die Rolle des Ahriman, sondern wenn ich auch sehe, wie diejenigen, die heute dem geisteswissenschaftlichen Leben noch ferne stehen, wie die Bühnenarbeiter für uns gerne arbeiten. Man sieht das, und ich empfinde es eigentlich immer als eine gewisse Dankbarkeit, wenn dieser oder jener Arbeiter kommt und verlangt, er möchte auch ein Buch haben. Es ist alles das - ich weiß es wohl, meine lieben Freunde — etwas Anfängliches und Unvollkommenes, aber etwas, von dem wir sagen können, es ist etwas Fruchtbares, etwas, was wirken wird. Und wenn von dem, was wir da tun durften im Beginne unserer Münchner Mittelpunktsunternehmung, das eine in unsere Seele zieht: daß Geisteswissenschaft nicht sein soll etwas Abstraktes, was man so nebenher auch im Leben betreibt, sondern daß sie zusammenhängt mit unseren gesamten Lebensbedingungen, dann hat die schwache Leistung, die damit vollbracht werden soll, für den Anfang zunächst ihre Wirkung getan. Dann ist etwas von dem erreicht, was wir wollten. Aus diesem Geiste heraus begrüße ich Sie heute für diesen Zyklus, der gewidmet sein soll einigen Betrachtungen über mancherlei, was uns entgegentritt, wenn wir den Blick in die große Welt richten und das empfinden, wovon in der alten Griechenzeit gesagt worden ist, daß von ihm alle Theosophie, alle Philosophie ausgeht; wenn wir das empfinden, was man Verwunderung nennt und wovon das Wort Wunder doch kommt, wenn wir etwas erleben von einem Vorgefühl dessen, was man Seelenprüfung nennt, und etwas empfinden von dem, was als Erlösung von aller Verwunderung, als Befreiung von aller Prüfung erscheint: den Geistesoffenbarungen. Das, was man von allen diesen dreien: von den Naturwundern, den Seelenprüfungen, von den erlösenden Geistesoffenbarungen, empfinden kann, das soll der Gegenstand unserer nächsten Betrachtungen werden.

First Lecture

The first words of this year's Munich events were entrusted to Hermes, the messenger of the gods, and we may perhaps interpret this entrustment of Hermes' words in a symbolic way in relation to what we want to see in our spiritual science, what we want to feel in it. For us, spiritual science is not merely something that brings us knowledge or insight similar to other knowledge, other insights into the world, but is a real mediator into those worlds from which, according to the view of ancient Greece, Hermes brought down to human beings what could ignite within them the forces that lead up to these realms of the supersensible. And following on from these words, allow me today, in this introductory lecture, to add a few things to what we have heard in the presentations of the last few days, so that it can be combined with everything that will be discussed in the coming days to form a whole.

These presentations are not given merely to embellish our event, but should be seen as being intimately and organically connected with what has been the focus of our spiritual scientific work here for many years. This year, it has been possible to launch this event by reviving the drama that stands at the very beginning of all Western drama, the drama that we can only truly grasp when we look beyond everything that drama, as an art form, has brought to the West throughout history. And this is also why this drama is a worthy introduction to an undertaking that is based on the humanities. For this drama reaches back to those times in European cultural development when the individual human spiritual currents that we encounter today as science, religion, and art were not yet separated from one another but were intimately connected. We thus turn our feelings, as it were, to the primeval times of European cultural development, to those times when a unified culture, born directly out of the deepest spiritual life, permeated the human soul with religious exaltation to the highest that man can achieve for his whole soul, so that direct religious life pulsated in this culture. And it can be said that this culture was religion. Religion was not something to which man turned as a special branch of culture, but even when he spoke of those parts of spiritual life that directly penetrated the practical branches of everyday life, he still spoke of religion, for this penetration was an elevation to religion, which extended its rays over everything that man could experience.

But this religion was internally strong and powerful in its individual forces, so that it did not stop at the general elevation of religious feeling to the great world powers; this original religion of humanity was so powerful that it inspired the individual forces of human spiritual life, so that they took on forms that were directly artistic forms. Religious life poured forth in bold creations, and religion and art were one. Art was the direct daughter of religion, still living in close family connection with her mother, religion itself. There is no feeling of such religious depth in our time as that which animated all those who were allowed to participate in the ancient mysteries and see how religious life poured forth into what was presented to human beings in artistic form. But this primitive religion, with its daughter, art, was at the same time so purified, so elevated into the etheric spheres of spiritual life, that as it acted upon the human soul, everything came out of this soul which we today have as a faint, abstract reflection in science and knowledge. When the deepened feeling allowed itself to be inspired by what poured forth as religion in artistic form, then the knowledge of the gods and divine things, the knowledge of the spirit world, was kindled in the soul. And so knowledge or insight was the other daughter of religious life, who also lived in close family ties, intimately united with the primordial mother of all culture, with religious culture.

Let us ask ourselves today: How far do we want to take what we can currently offer as only a weak beginning? What do we actually want to achieve? We want to rekindle something in humanity like the union, the harmony between art and science. For only in this way can the gaze of the human soul, fired by feeling and energized by the best in our willpower, pour out that unity over all human education which will lead human beings back up to the divine heights of their existence, just as it will penetrate the most everyday activities of our lives. And everything that is otherwise only profane life, and which became profane life only because its connection with the spiritual-divine source of all existence was forgotten, will become sacred.

Thus, through an undertaking such as we have pursued this year, we wish to point precisely to this feeling that should and must inspire us if we mean by spiritual science that which is to penetrate into the deepest depths of the human soul. This explains why, in the best sense of the word, it can be considered spiritual scientific to view the mystery of Eleusis as a kind of sun whose rays, pouring into our hearts, can evoke in us the right feeling for what spiritual science actually is.

What is otherwise known as drama, what the Western world perceives as dramatic art and which reached its peak in Shakespeare, is in fact a spiritual current that originated in the ancient mystery, a secularization of the ancient mystery. So when we go back to the origins of dramatic art, we come back to something like the mystery of Eleusis. Having thus outlined in general terms the thoughts that inspired us years ago when we performed this drama at the International Theosophical Congress in Munich, I may now perhaps mention a few specific points which, because everyday life is so closely connected — everyday life now meant in the best spiritual sense with what we have in mind as a spiritual ideal — is capable of shedding some light on our will, on our goals. When we set out some time ago to perform “The Children of Lucifer,” I was reminded that a thought had occurred to me at the time that I feel is deeply connected with our present spiritual-scientific development in Central Europe. When I felt the time had come to connect my spiritual quest with what can be called anthroposophy or spiritual science, the door through which I tried to enter anthroposophy was a discussion that tied in with the drama “The Children of Lucifer.” And then we allowed a seven-year period of development to pass for the spiritual scientific work we had conceived. But the seed that was sown in our souls at that time with the words spoken about “The Children of Lucifer” developed quietly in our hearts during a lawful seven-year epoch. And after seven years, we were ready to present the drama “The Children of Lucifer” as an introduction to our Munich endeavors.

At this hour, which is to be devoted to the introductory words to my lectures of the coming days, I may perhaps link this thought to another, for I speak to you, my dear friends, from the bottom of my heart and at the same time from the deepest conviction of my soul. That which will increasingly take hold of the spirits of the Western world as spiritual life in the future will have to take on a very special form. Today, people have very different ideas about anthroposophy or spiritual science. People do not always think according to the necessities of existence, according to the forces at work in human development, but rather according to their will and their feelings, and then one person may regard this as the right ideal, while another regards that as the right ideal. Thus there will be many anthroposophical ideals, depending on the nature of human hearts, depending on whether their feelings and emotions incline toward this or that side. True occultism in a certain higher form, however, still allows us to see such an inclination toward ideals as something that is only attached to our personality, something that can still be characterized in such a way that one can say: Such ideals are really only what one person or another would like to see as anthroposophy, what they believe to be the best according to their particular heartfelt feelings and the particular configuration of their intellect. After all, people have only those opinions about other things in life that spring from such heartfelt feelings, from such personal motives. Spiritual science itself, however, must lead us to regard what springs from our personal heartfelt feelings as not at all authoritative. As personalities, we can always be mistaken, no matter how much we believe that we are paying homage to a selfless ideal. We can only form an opinion about what should happen in human development when we completely suppress our personal opinions about the ideal and when we no longer ask ourselves what we ourselves consider to be the best way of representing spiritual science. Only then can we arrive at a true opinion, when we let the necessities of life speak, regardless of our own inclinations — whether we prefer this or that form of spiritual life, whether we like this or that better — when we ask ourselves: How has European cultural life developed over the centuries, and what does it require for the near future? When we ask ourselves this question without committing ourselves personally to the answer, we receive a twofold answer. The first, the big one, emerges from everything that is happening in spiritual life today: European cultural life requires spiritual science if it is not to wither and die. The other answer, however, is this: European cultural life requires a spiritual science that corresponds to the fundamental conditions that have developed over centuries, not in any one of us, but in European humanity as a whole. But we can only bring about a spiritual science that meets these basic conditions of European cultural life if we ask ourselves selflessly: What have people in Europe learned to feel and think over the centuries, and how do Europeans today yearn for spiritual deepening in their lives?

When we ask ourselves this question, all the signs of the times show us that it cannot be the continuation of our ordinary mysticism as we have known it for thousands of years, as it has had such a beneficial effect on different peoples for thousands of years. The continuation of this mysticism alone, in the sense in which it has always been, as handed down by history, would not be able to meet the needs of European cultural life. If we wanted merely to immerse ourselves in old mysticism, we would be sinning against this European cultural life and everything connected with it; we would be placing our personal inclinations above the necessity of existence. Let us suppress our personal inclinations—even if they lean toward some form of ancient mysticism—and ask ourselves: What do people need, given the conditions in which they have developed over the centuries? — Likewise, the signs of the times show us that what we call present-day scientific activity — however highly regarded it may be today, however much authority it may enjoy — is in a state like a tree that is withering away and can bear only the sparsest fruit for the future. I know that it is a “big word” to say, but it is certainly not “bold” to say that What is today called external science in the sphere of European life is a withering branch in the spiritual sky of humanity. It has served its purpose, and it is not diminished by the fact that we are now shining a light on the conditions of its existence, as has been done in a few words.

Neither old mysticism nor new science will be of any use to the humanity of the future when the deepest needs assert themselves, needs that seek to establish a bond between the human soul and spiritual revelations. This stood written in golden letters before the ideal that we had in mind when we began, years ago, to develop spiritual life on a broader scale. And if I may now utter those words which I said were as much words from my heart as words of conviction, I would like to say, quite objectively and factually, in the spirit of the question I have just raised: The most significant literary beginning of the kind of spiritual life that the European humanity of the future will need to the greatest extent, which stands in the middle between mere historical mysticism, picked up somewhere from historical documents, and science, which is a withering branch of human culture — the most significant beginning in a truly anthroposophical sense, which considers immediate life, as it is now slowly trickling down as spiritual life, as it will continue to spread, are “The Great Initiates” by our revered Edouard Schuré. I was able to point this out at the beginning of my Munich course last year: anyone who knows how to look a little into the future, at what this future will demand of us, knows that this has paved the way for literary life to strike a golden mean between ancient mysticism and modern, but withering science, and that the beautiful, meaningful beginning that has already been made for all European peoples with “Les grands initiés,” “The Great Initiates,” will continue to develop further and further, and that this characterizes a nuance of color that makes a sympathetic impression on us not because we are familiar with it, but because it is new to us. Les grands Inities,” the ‘Great Initiates,’ will continue to develop further and further, and that this characterizes a nuance of color that makes a favorable impression on us, not because we want this or that out of our personal inclinations, but because we see how the increasingly assertive European cultural conditions demanded, out of their spiritual conditions, that such a literary beginning be made. If you are familiar with this work, my dear friends, then you also know how significantly it refers to what is further elaborated in Edouard Schur's “Heiligtümer des Orients” (Sanctuaries of the Orient), and how significantly it refers to the mystery of Eleusis. What can this reference in The Great Initiates inspire in us in a truly anthroposophical sense, and what can this new creation of the mystery of Eleusis inspire in our souls?

Now, my dear friends, when we look back to the very beginnings of European art and spiritual life, we see two figures standing, as it were, at the starting point, figures that have a profound significance for a truly spiritual understanding of the whole of modern spiritual life, figures that at first appear to us as symbolic representations of great spiritual impulses. These two figures, who for those who take a deeper look into contemporary spiritual life appear like rays of light proclaiming the most meaningful things, are Persephone and Iphigenia. When we utter these two names, we essentially touch, in a certain way, two souls of modern human beings, those two souls whose union challenges the deepest soul trials of this human being. In the next few days, we will see more clearly how Persephone stirs in our hearts the thought of that impulse which we have already touched upon frequently in our spiritual scientific discussions here. Once upon a time, the whole of humanity was destined to arrive at its insights in a different way than it does today. We know from these spiritual scientific lectures of an ancient clairvoyance of humanity that sprang forth from human nature in ancient times as a matter of course, so that, like hunger, thirst, and the need to breathe, clairvoyant images formed out of the human soul, into which the secrets of the spiritual worlds poured themselves. This is something that human beings once possessed as a gift of ancient clairvoyance and which has been robbed from them, as it were, by what later became knowledge in human life. Partly feeling that it was precisely in his time that this robbery of ancient clairvoyance was being carried out by modern knowledge, and partly foreseeing how this would happen more and more in future times, which are now ours, the ancient Greek turned his soul's gaze upward to that divine figure who had detached the forces that led to that ancient clairvoyance in the human soul from the immediate elemental nature. They looked up to that goddess who was the ruler of the ancient clairvoyance bound to human nature, and called her Persephone. And then the ancient Greeks said to themselves: In place of the ancient culture of seers, another will increasingly take its place, one directed by human beings, born of human beings who have already lost the ancient clairvoyance. - In the culture that the ancient Greeks linked to the names of Agamemnon, Odysseus, and Menelaus, we find what we recognize today as our outer spiritual culture, no longer touched by clairvoyant powers.

Today, people in the wider world no longer feel that this culture, which produces knowledge that is to be used just as much to philosophically explore the mysteries of existence, just as it builds cannons through its knowledge of the laws of nature, that in a deeper sense this type of spiritual culture demands sacrifices that humans must make to the higher spiritual beings who guide the supersensible worlds. These sacrifices are also made, but people today do not notice them because they do not yet pay attention to these things. The ancient Greeks realized that this modern culture, which they traced back to the names of Agamemnon, Menelaus, and Odysseus, demanded sacrifices, that it was that daughter of the human spirit who, in a certain sense, must be sacrificed again and again. And the ancient Greeks represented this perpetual sacrifice of intellectual culture in the sacrifice of Agamemnon's daughter, Iphigenia. This is how a wondrous answer to the question posed to us by the sacrifices of Iphigenia sounds to us. If only there were that external culture which, in the true sense of the ancient Greeks, can be traced back to the names of Agamemnon, Menelaus, and Odysseus, then humanity, under the influence of this culture, would long since have withered away in its hearts, in its deepest soul forces. Only because humanity preserved the feeling of making sacrifices again and again and of extracting from this general intellectual culture that culture which, in a deeper, not superficial sense, can be called a priestly culture, has this culture been preserved from withering away. Just as Iphigenia was offered as a sacrifice to Artemis but became a priestess through this sacrifice, so certain elements of our intellectual culture had to be purified and cleansed throughout the centuries and millennia, and offered to the higher gods with a priestly-religious character, so that this outer intellectual culture would not wither away in the hearts and souls of humanity. Thus Persephone represents the guide and leader of the ancient clairvoyant culture, and Iphigenia represents the eternal sacrifice that our outer intellectuality must make to the deeper religious life.

The things I have just said have always been alive in the whole stream of European cultural life from ancient Greece to the most modern times; they have always lived from those times when Socrates first separated pure scientific thinking from the ancient culture of unity, until the time when poor Nietzsche, in the pain of his soul, writhed over the separation of the three branches of culture as a whole, science, religion, and art, and perished because of this separation. The modern era, because the forces that are to bring about the reunification of what had to be separated for thousands of years are already at work, and because the demands of the future are already shining through into the present, must once again take up, in its representatives who are inspired by the spirit of the times, those two impulses that have just been characterized: the names Iphigenia and Persephone. And those who see this feel even more deeply what an act it was for Goethe, immersing himself completely in ancient Greek life, to represent what he himself considered the pinnacle of his art in the symbol of Iphigenia. Oh, with this act of Goethe's, in which, in a certain sense, all of Goethe's work is symbolically expressed, with “Iphigenia,” the first connection is made to ancient European intellectual heritage. And in the depths of our hearts, Goethe's act echoes to us today: we must remember once again the eternal sacrifice that intellectual culture must make to religious culture if intellectuality is not to lay waste to European humanity.

In a certain sense, what intellectual culture achieves in a broader sense is as rough for higher spiritual life as King Thoas in “Iphigenia.” What we encounter in the symbol of Iphigenia is mild and harmonious, not to hate along with humanity, but to love along with it. And so the first memory of the most significant impulses of European intellectual life was given at the moment when Goethe's heart was filled with the inspiration to present Iphigenia to European humanity as the testimony of the everlasting sacrifice of intellectuality. In this way, one can sense the illumination of the spiritual inspirers of modern times in Goethe's soul.

A second memory was necessary, one that had to be waited for a little longer, a memory that points to those times when the ancient clairvoyant culture associated with the name Persephone was still active. And one senses, at the point where the “Great Sacrificed Ones” rise to a certain climax in reference to the mystery of Eleusis, one senses how European spiritual life, with its inspirers, is working to conjure out of the twilight of the ages what must increasingly lead to the realization that the old clairvoyant culture represented in the name Persephone must reappear in a new form. One pole in modern European spiritual life was provided by the revival of the ancient Greek figure of Iphigenia, the other pole by Edouard Schuré's re-creation of the mystery of Eleusis. And we must regard it as one of the best stars shining upon our endeavors that we were able to let this inauguration shine upon our anthroposophical life in the presence of the new creator of the mystery of Eleusis, who has already blessed us with his presence for several years in our Central European spiritual life.

I said: What I have just said is only on the one hand a heartfelt thought; on the other hand, it is a thought that springs entirely from the most objective, sober conviction. And the reason I have expressed it today is that I must adhere to Goethe's words, which ring like a wondrous pearl of wisdom in our life of knowledge: Only that is true which proves fruitful. And if some fruitfulness can be seen in what we have been allowed to do for years, then it must also be acknowledged that the idea that has inspired our work for many years, that has always been present like a secret guest, like a secret comrade-in-arms, has proven itself to be true precisely through its fruitfulness. We will return to everything that would now follow on from the thoughts just expressed about the names Iphigenia and Persephone in the most varied ways in the coming days, as illustrations when discussing the wonders of nature, trials of the soul, and revelations of the spirit. It should only be mentioned that just as Iphigenia is the daughter of Agamemnon, who belongs to those heroes to whom ancient Greece attributes the cultivation of intellectuality in its broadest sense, with all its practical and also warlike manifestations, so Persephone is the daughter of Demeter. Now, we will see how Demeter is the ruler of the greatest wonders of nature, an archetype of human feeling, thinking, and willing, whose true child is Persephone. That archetype points to times when human brain life was not yet separated from general bodily life, when, so to speak, nutrition through external substances and thinking through the instrument of the brain were not separate human activities. Then one could still feel how thought lives out there when the seeds thrive in the fields, how hope really spreads out there over the fields and permeates the workings of nature like the song of the lark. One still felt that spiritual life draws in with the material, submerges itself in the human body, purifies itself, and becomes spirit as the primal mother from whom Persephone is born in the human being itself. In those primeval times of human development, when human nature still seemed so unified that all physical life was at the same time spiritual, that all physical processing was intimately united with the spiritual processing of thought, the name Demeter points us upward. And what it looked like then can only be taught to us today by looking into the Akashic Records. That Persephone was the real daughter of Demeter is taught to us by this insight into the Akashic Records. And it will also become clear that in that figure who appears in the new creation of the mystery of Eleusis, in Eros, there is indeed, according to ancient Greek feeling, that which has made the forces of Demeter in the gradually developing humanity what they are today. Thus, the whole miracle of human nature is immediately conjured up before our soul when Demeter stands before us with the solemn warning of a primal force that magically pervades all human feeling. When Demeter stands before us, there is something standing before us that speaks through the eternities of time as an impulse of human nature. We feel this pouring down from the stage when Demeter stands before us, the greatest representative of that primal force which we today can only describe with the abstract name of human chastity, with all its fertile reality, where it is not asceticism, where it includes the primal love of humanity at the same time. On the other hand, what speaks to us from Eros? The budding, innocent love. Eros is its ruler, or so the Greeks believed.

Now the drama unfolds. And what forces are at work with invigorating tragic power from the beginning throughout the entire drama? The interplay of chastity, which is at the same time primal love with its fertility, and innocent, still budding love, reigns in the drama, just as positive and negative electricity reigns outside in the trivial wonders of nature. Thus, through the space into which this significant human primal drama is poured, something of a more or less unconscious or conscious feeling can flow in opposition to forces that have been at work since the dawn of humanity and continue to permeate our modern lives. Only that—and here I am again pointing to something that will be further elaborated in the following days—in a certain sense, those primal currents, the Demeter current and the Eros current, are increasingly absorbed into the human future by those currents that are to be indicated in the three figures of Luna, Astrid, and Philia. A living connection should arise in our souls between the currents that are those of human origins: Demeter, Eros, and what stands between them, Persephone on the one hand, and on the other hand, what is dawning today in a form that has not yet taken on a personal shape. It is like a spiritual conscience that still echoes from the undefined and is not yet allowed to appear on the stage. It is only a voice from outside, and it is the three figures, as the real daughters of Demeter: Luna, Philia, Astrid.

I have tried to characterize for you the feelings from which the mystery of Eleusis, in its re-creation by Edward Schure, has been placed at the starting point of our spiritual-scientific considerations. You, my dear friends, will surely view our present remarks on this significant work with the perspective that should be natural to all who stand within our anthroposophical stream, given all that has preceded in recent years. What does this perspective demand of us? Well, today it is incredibly easy, truly child's play, to point out the mistakes and perhaps even the amateurishness that we all make when we approach a work as significant as The Mystery of Eleusis with our limited abilities, drawing on what dramatic art offers us in the outside world. But it is not important to us, or rather, it must not be important to us, to characterize things in the same way as they are characterized and portrayed on our contemporary stages. However, those who already sense something of what we are trying to achieve by imprinting the peculiarity of spiritual knowledge on art will know that what matters to us is something completely different. They will also know that everything that can only achieve a certain perfection in the future must appear imperfect in the present. It is not our job to compete with external stage performances. We do not even think of doing the same thing in any way, and even the mere comparison with other external stage performances is a mistake. Whatever an artistic judgment may say about what is demanded today in external stage performances, it is dilettantism in relation to what the humanities really want, must want, including in relation to art.

And those of you who feel as I do, who can share that deep feeling of gratitude I feel every time at the beginning of our Munich endeavors toward all those who are helpful in these endeavors, those friends among you who feel this will not consider it unobjective, not something personal, if I again this year commemorate this deepest feeling of gratitude at the end of my introductory remarks. It takes more than many hands to make these endeavors possible; it takes souls that are truly imbued with what can be the most beautiful fruit of a spiritually striving life, and what I would like to call spiritual warmth. And this spiritual warmth never remains without consequences, never without a gradually developing ability to achieve what one wants in the corresponding field. And so we stand there every time we set to work, initially as a small group of people here in Munich who are the forerunners of the larger community that will then come together, imbued with spiritual warmth, and we have faith in our work, even if everything is quite bumpy at first: it has to work. And it works to the extent that we are able to achieve it. In this undertaking, we always find proof of the reality that spiritual forces are at work in the world, that they help us, that we can surrender ourselves to them. And when it sometimes seems to us that it will not work, we tell ourselves that if it did not work, it would be in accordance with the forces behind our work. And then it would be right that it did not work. And so we act, and we do not think at all about what should ultimately come out of it. We think of the spiritual forces to which we also want to make a small, weak sacrifice in the spirit of our time, the sacrifice of present-day intellectualism to the religious deepening of the human heart. And it is beautiful to see how this spiritual warmth is indeed present in a wonderful way in that small group, how each individual actually experiences something spiritual by undertaking this sacrifice, which is by no means easy. It is a brotherly work that the others who are involved are doing for us; and those who understand me in these words will feel with me the feelings of gratitude that I wish to express at this moment.

Our first thanks go, of course, to the new creator of the “Mystery of Eleusis,” but then our most varied feelings of gratitude go to my co-workers during this time in Munich. Above all, I would like to mention those who, through their work imbued with such loving spiritual warmth in the service of spiritual science over many years, have made themselves available to combine their beautiful, warm abilities with what we want to achieve here. Let me first satisfy a deep desire of my heart by mentioning two individuals who have contributed in a very special way, so that today the beautiful unity of their spiritual thinking and their purely technical work in our Munich enterprise shines forth everywhere: Miss Stinde and Countess Kalckreuth. Let me mention our dear friend Adolf Arenson, who, as in previous years, has provided the musical accompaniment for all three mornings this year. I leave it to your own hearts and souls to judge these performances. I myself consider it particularly fortunate that the musical part of our work is contributed to our overall effort in this way by our dear friend Arenson. And I also consider it particularly fortunate that what I had in mind as a stage design imbued with a truly religious spirit could be realized in such an excellent manner by our dear Miss von Eckhardtstein. To me, my dear friends, every red and blue spot, every shine and every dull tone in the stage design is important and meaningful, and the fact that this is felt by the designated personality is part of what we must perceive as truly spirit-inspired work. And I need only point out to you everything that has come to your attention in the wider context of the stage designs which our painters Mr. Linde, Mr. Volckert, and Mr. Haß have contributed to our dramatic inaugurations; and I would like to take this opportunity to encourage you to consider how the spiritual idea has poured into the souls of these personalities in such a way that it retains its power right down to the brushstrokes. It is spirituality that you see in the stage design contributed by the three aforementioned artists. In everything mentioned here, we do not, of course, see something complete, but rather something that is the beginning of a desire, and we would now like you to see, through everything that is desired but cannot yet be achieved, how the further development of art can be imagined. That is why it is of such infinite importance to us that the inner dramatic design also lies solely in the hands of performers who strive for spiritual insight, for I do not want—not out of personal inclination, but because I must—a single word in our dramatic undertakings on stage to be spoken by someone of a different mind, even if that word were spoken with the highest artistic perfection and with the utmost artistic refinement of contemporary linguistic stage technique. For something quite different is desired than this external stage technique. What is called art today is not desired. What is desired is that in every soul that stands up there and participates, the heart speaks out of spiritual warmth, that such a breath passes through the entire performance, however good or bad it may be, that we experience spiritual warmth as art, art as spiritual warmth. Therefore, everyone who participates in these inaugural events of the Munich cycle should have the feeling that there is no word that, when spoken, is not at the same time felt in the deepest soul of the performer. In some respects, this is the effect of that artistic chastity which those who do not want to feel spiritually may regard as dilettantism, but which is the beginning of something that is to come, the beginning of something that will one day be felt as artistic truth in the deepest, most spiritual sense of the word, however imperfect and rudimentary it may appear to you today. That is why, my dear friends, who have the necessary understanding, we would never dream of resorting to dramatic flourishes. You will calmly endure all the lengths that the matter may require. Nothing is too long for us, nothing is too undramatic in the usual modern sense, because we do not follow external dramatic demands, but rather the inner necessities of the matter, and we will never deny our dramatic convictions. Take, for example, the fairy tale that Felicia tells Capesius in the fifth scene of “The Trial of the Soul.” The average theatergoer would say, “That's boring to death.” We will never shy away from bringing this boredom to the stage if the dramatic truth in the spiritual sense demands it of us. And dramatic freedom demands that every individual who shows us love be allowed to participate and act freely in their place, so that everyone can feel that what they do and say on stage is their own words and feelings. You will not see tyrannical direction, as is so often loved these days, in our enterprise. Instead, you will see, albeit initially and imperfectly, that spirit which spreads invisibly like a breath over the enterprise as a whole, but which can work as a multiplicity in each individual soul. That is why, when you are in the midst of such an undertaking, you feel above all a deep gratitude toward what each individual performer has sacrificed. This feeling of gratitude must be expressed here to all of them, from Miss von Sivers to those who had smaller roles. It is not possible to list them all individually, because so many have offered their help. But all have accomplished a great deal. I need only mention the person who devoted himself so selflessly to one of this year's leading roles, a role that is particularly close to my heart and which is very difficult because it presents great inner difficulties: I am referring to the role of Capesius, played by our dear Mr. Doser. I need only point out how selflessly our dear Mr. Seiling has already devoted two years to portraying that character whom I would like to call the dramatic conscience, who is not yet allowed on stage today, but who proves his vitality by not appearing in person on stage, and how the same Mr. Seiling has portrayed the role of Strader with great mastery in the past and this year. Performances such as that offered in the fourth scene on the third day in the dramatic dialogue between Capesius and Strader already give our souls a glimpse of what will come to be when art is pulsed through with spiritual insight as if it were its lifeblood, and spiritual insight is shaped by art as if it were its physicality. That is why I felt such deep gratitude when this beautiful moment of dramatic achievement appeared before our eyes in the fourth scene.

And now I could continue this expression of gratitude in many ways. Finally, I could thank you yourselves, all of you who have shown understanding in your souls for what will one day be necessary in future drama: that the invisible reigns alongside the visible, that suggestion may go hand in hand with cruder external representation, that characters must be placed, I would say, in more favorable stage lighting, and other things that must be hidden more deeply in the depths of human speech. What is meant and what will be felt more and more as true opinion in the three characters Philia, Astrid, and Luna can only be revealed from one perspective, in the light in which it confronts us in the three characters when they appear in person on stage. But with these three characters, in whom important impulses of human development are meant, intimate secrets of the soul are also touched upon, which can only be understood if one connects what is pushed to the fore on the one hand in sharp, intrusive stage lighting with what is hinted at on the other hand in the three female characters through the intimacy of the words. These three female figures, who appear in the silvery moonlight and form that chalice from the fleeting shapes of water droplets, which is an intimate representation of what they want in their more obvious and more intimate illumination, these figures who appear to us in the silvery moonlight of the fairy tale and show us how they accompany human souls as the intimate friends of our soul, how they take shape in childhood and how they take shape when three times three hundred and sixty weeks have passed, can only be understood if one considers both: what captures the meaning and is outwardly revealed in a cruder form on stage, and what would be so boring to modern theatergoers, the narration of an intimate fairy tale, which, however, is the only thing that can convey the intimacy that lies in three characters such as Luna, Astrid, and Philia. And when one sees that there are already a number of souls today who can feel uninhibited and pure towards what is otherwise not easily forgiven on stage, then one can say that spiritual science is grateful to the depths of these souls, to all of you, for wanting to guide and direct your souls to empathize with and accept what is intended here in the service of spiritual knowledge. From all this, you will consider it something objective when, at the end of this introduction to our coming reflections, these feelings of gratitude are expressed. And I feel a grateful joy again and again when I see not only our dear co-workers working together and fitting into the new, as for example our dear Mr. Mercklein found his way into the role of Ahriman, but also when I see how those who are still far removed from spiritual scientific life, such as the stagehands, enjoy working for us. You can see this, and I always feel a certain gratitude when this or that worker comes and asks if he can have a book too. It is all this—I know it well, my dear friends—something beginning and imperfect, but something of which we can say it is fruitful, something that will have an effect. And if, from what we were allowed to do at the beginning of our Munich center venture, one thing draws us to our soul: that the humanities should not be something abstract that one pursues on the side in life, but that they are connected to our entire living conditions, then the modest achievement that is to be accomplished with this has, for a start, had its effect. Then something of what we wanted has been achieved. In this spirit, I welcome you today to this cycle, which is to be devoted to some reflections on various things that confront us when we look out into the big world and feel what the ancient Greeks said was the source of all theosophy, all philosophy; when we feel what is called wonder, and from which the word miracle derives, when we experience something of a premonition of what is called a trial of the soul, and feel something of what appears as redemption from all wonder, as liberation from all trials: the revelations of the spirit. What can be felt from all three of these—from the wonders of nature, the trials of the soul, and the redeeming revelations of the spirit—will be the subject of our next reflections.