The Ego: The God Within and the God of External Revelation
GA 124
12 December 1910, Munich
III. The Temple Language
In the course of years, considerations have been brought forward in the various groups in different lecture-cycles, for a great number of the anthroposophical friends sitting here, on the John Gospel, the Luke Gospel, the Matthew Gospel, and we have attempted in these considerations, on the three gospels, to let appear before our spiritual eye the great event of Palestine, the Mystery of Golgotha, from three different sides, as it were, in three varying ways. And perhaps these considerations have proved adapted to lay in our souls the foundations for an ever-increasing valuation of this unique event. We have already pointed out how the reason why we have four gospels is to be sought essentially in the fact that the writers of the gospels, as inspired occultists, wanted to represent this great event each from his own side, just as one copies or photographs something external from one standpoint. And if one takes photographs of a thing from different sides, so through a combination of what results, through bringing them together before the soul, one can come to the true reality. Each of the evangelists really gives us opportunity to consider the great event of Palestine from one special side. From a side which we can call at the same time the opening of the highest human, occult and other aims, and beside this highest human principle, also taking into account the highest world principle—from this side it is the John Gospel which gives us an insight into the great event of Palestine.
The Luke Gospel opens for us an insight into the secrets, which hover round the personality of Jesus of Nazareth, of the Solomon and Nathan Jesus, up to the moment where the great inspiration of Jesus of Nazareth is replaced by the Christ.
The Matthew Gospel, for those who have heard the lecture-cycle on it, or have read it later, has to show how from the people of ancient Hebraism, from the folk-secrets of the Hebrew people, the physical principle of life (as it were) was prepared, in which the Christ-Principle should incarnate for three years.
In a certain connection it is again the Mark Gospel which can lead us into the highest summits of the anthroposophical, Christian method of observation, and through the Mark Gospel opportunity is given us to look into many things which should be imparted to us through the gospels, but are not brought near to us in such a way by the other evangelists. And I have laid on myself the task of saying a few words because opportunity offers itself today to speak of the Mark Gospel.
If we speak of this, we must be quite clear how necessary it is to look into many things for which the superficial world of the present has no real inclination. If one is to understand the Mark Gospel and all its depths, one must become acquainted with the quite different method of expression among men at the time when Christ Jesus walked on earth. Do not take it amiss, if I attempt to say to you what I really intend, through a distinct shading, a distinct twilight.
We express through speech what we want to say. And what lives in our soul should in a certain way be made obvious in the words of speech. In this method of expressing through speech what lives in our soul, the various epochs of human development are very different from each other. If we went back to the epoch of the old Hebrew evolution, to that wonderful method of expression which was still possible in the old Hebraic temple-speech, we should find quite another method of clothing the secrets of our soul in words, than people today have any idea of. When a word sounded in the old Hebraic speech—only the consonants were written, the vowels were then added—then there did not merely sound in this word what sounds in it today; a more or less abstract idea... but a whole world. Because of this, the vowels were not really written, because he who spoke gave out his most inner being just through his way of vocalising, whereas in the consonants, there lay more the description, the portraying of what is outside. One can say that when, e.g., an ancient Hebrew drew a “B”—what corresponds today with our “B”—he always felt something like a portraying of external relationships, of something which formed a warm, hut-like enclosure. The letter “B” always evoked the picture of something which, house-like, could surround a being. One could not utter the “B” without that living in the soul. And if one vocalised an “A,” one could not do it without something of strength, of force, even of radiating power, living within it. Thus the soul lived further. The soul-content worked outwards with the words, soared into space and into other souls. Thus speech was then a far more living affair. It entered far more into the secrets of existence than our speech.
That is the light which I wanted to place before you. And the shadows I must represent in contrast; that we in our time have become to a high degree in this connection pedants. Our languages only express abstractions, generalities. One does not even feel that any more. Speech only expresses now pedantry, fundamentally. How should this be different in an age when people even begin to manipulate it in literary fashion long before they have a spiritual content; in an age when such an infinite amount goes into the broad masses as print, when each one thinks he must write something, when everything becomes an object for writing. I have had to experience that even in the founding of our society, authors turned up from curiosity, who had the intention of being able to extract perhaps a novel out of the matter: why should not forms exist there which one can have on tap and retail in a public writing shop? Thus we must be quite clear that we have a speech which has become abstract, empty, pedantic—in contrast to the way in which one formerly conceived it as something holy, to which one felt the responsibility that GOD should speak from out of it. Hence it is so infinitely difficult to squeeze into modern words those great, tremendous facts, which are imparted to us and which sound to us, for instance, in the gospels. Why should the man of today not also believe that one can give everything in our speech? He cannot understand that our speech says something empty with what even the Greek speech still meant with a word. And if we read the Bible today, we read something which, compared with its original content, has been sifted once, twice, three times, but so sifted, that there remains not the best but always the worst. Therefore it is naturally cheap in a certain way to appeal to the modern words of the Bible. But we go astray most of all if we appeal to the Bible in the case of the Mark Gospel, as it lies before us today. In any case we must not do that.
Now you know that the Mark Gospel had in its first lines as its basis the words which the translation by Weizsacker, regarded as exceptionally good (but it is conceivable that what is regarded today as so excellent, need not be so really), renders as follows: “As stands written in the prophet Isaiah; Behold, I send my messenger before thee, who shall prepare the way for thee; listen how it calls in the wilderness; prepare the way of the Lord; make straight his paths.”
Honest people must really say to themselves, if the Mark Gospel begins thus in this Weizsacker: I do not understand a single word of it all. Whoever will understand it must really resolve to do something. Whoever goes sincerely to work, cannot understand anything when it is said: “Behold, I send my messenger before thee, who shall prepare the way for thee; listen how it calls in the wilderness; prepare the way of the lord; make straight his paths.” For either a triviality is uttered, or something is said which one cannot understand. One must first bring together those ideas which make it possible to understand such an utterance as that of Isaiah's here. For Isaiah points to that great, mighty event, which should be the most significant event in human evolution. What is he really pointing to? Now from what we have already described, we can well indicate what Isaiah predicted. We can indicate it by saying: In ancient times, man had a kind of clairvoyance; he had the possibility of growing with his soul-forces into the divine spiritual world. What really happened with man when he grew thus into the divine spiritual world? Then it was the case that when he grew into the divine spiritual world he ceased to employ his Ego, so far as it was developed at that time. He used his astral body, in which were those forces which were the forces of vision, of seership, whereas all the forces rooted in the Ego were gradually awakened through the perception of the physical world. It is the Ego which employs the instruments of the senses. The ancient human being, however, when he sought illumination about the world, employed his astral body. The ancient human being saw, perceived in the astral body. Further evolution consisted in this, that the transition was found from the astral body to the use of the Ego. With reference to this Ego, the Christ-Impulse had to be the most intense impulse. If, now, the Christ is taken up into the Ego so that the phrase of Paul is true, “Not I, but the Christ in me,” then the Ego has the power of growing into the spiritual world through itself. Formerly, only the astral body could do this.
Thus we have an evolution of humanity before us of which we can say: Man employed his astral body as organ of knowledge, but he lost more and more the possibility of developing an organ of knowledge in his astral body. And the more one approached the Christ Event, that stage of evolution arose of which man must say: My astral body has less and less the possibility of looking into the spiritual world. Nothing arose through its union with the spiritual world, and the Ego was not yet forceful enough to get, from its side, any illumination from the world. That was the age when the Christ drew near.
Now in the real evolution of mankind, it is a question of certain great strides being gradually prepared, which then occur. This was the case with the Christ-Impulse. But a transition had to exist. Things could not so run their course that man saw how his astral body gradually became dull towards the spiritual world, so that he would have felt utter barrenness and desolation in himself, until the Ego was kindled through the Christ-Impulse. Things could not take this course. But in the case of a few it happened through an especial influence from the spiritual world, they saw something already in the astral body similar to the way one should later see and know through the Ego: The egoity (Ego-hood) was, as it were, prepared in the astral body. That was an anticipation of the egoity in the astral body. Man indeed first became earthly man through the Ego and its development. The astral body really belonged to the ancient moon. At that time, the angel, the angel-man, was at the human stage. The angel was man on the old moon. Man is man on the earth. We know that. On the old moon, it was man's task to use his astral body. Everything else was only preparation for the Ego-evolution. The beginning of our earth evolution was a repetition of the moon evolution. For man could never become fully man in the astral body; but on the moon, only the angel could become man in the astral body. Therefore—just as in the earth-man the Christ lived in order to inspire the Ego—so for the preparation of this Ego-hood the possibility had to be given, that from the angels of the moon—from the moon-men, the angels—prophets were so inspired in their human astral body, that the Ego could be prepared. There had thus to occur what a prophet could have characterised in the following way: There will come in human evolution a time when man will be ripe for the ego-evolution. In the astral body only the angels of the moon have raised themselves to the highest. But in order that man can be prepared for this egoity, certain human beings must be so inspired on earth, through grace, in exceptional conditions, that they work as angels, in spite of their being human; that they are angels in human form.
Here we come to an important occult idea, without which you cannot understand at all the evolution of humanity in the sense of occultism. Externally uttered, it is naturally easy if one simply says that all is Maya. Well, all right. But that is an abstraction. One must really take it earnestly. Therefore one must be able to say: There stands a man before me... that, however, is Maya! Who knows... is that, anyhow, a man? Perhaps the human existence is but the external veil, employed by quite another being than man is, just to bring about something which cannot yet be effected by man. I have indicated something of this in my Portal of Initiation.
In ancient times, such an event was actualised for humanity, when that individuality who lived in Elias was reborn in John the Baptist, and when, in the soul of John the Baptist, an angel entered for that incarnation, and employed the corporality, and also the soul-nature of John the Baptist, in order to effect what no human being would have been able to bring about. In John lived an angel, an angel who had to go before, and announce before, that which should live in Jesus of Nazareth, in the widest sense, as true Ego-hood [Ichheit]. It is extremely important to know that John the Baptist is a Maya (illusion), and in him there lives an angel, a messenger. This stands also in the Greek: “Behold, I send my messenger = Angel.” The German alone thinks no more of this, that in the Greek “Angel” stands in this place. “Behold I send my angel before him.” And so there is indicated a deep world-mystery which, preceded with the Baptist, was prophesied by Isaiah. He characterises John the Baptist as a Maya, as an illusion, he who in truth comprises the angel, who, as angel, has to announce what man really should become through the reception of the Christ-Impulse—because the angel has to announce beforehand—what man only later has to become. And so, at this place, there should be said: “Behold, that which gives the egoity to the world, sends the angel before thee, to whom the egoity should be given.”
Now we pass to the third sentence. What does it signify? Here one must call to mind the whole historic world-situation. How had things become in the human breast, since the astral body had gradually lost the power of stretching out its forces like tentacles, to look clairvoyantly into the divine spiritual world? Formerly, when the astral body was put in activity, it could see in the divine spiritual world. This possibility disappeared more and more, and it became dark in man. Man could formerly spread out his astral body over all the beings of the divine spiritual world. Now he was alone in himself—alone is the same as eremos [Greek ernmos] That which the soul was now, lived in the solitude. That also stands there in the Greek text: Behold, how it appears, how it there speaks in the solitude of the soul (or you could say “in the wilderness of the soul “)—when the astral body could no more spread itself out to the divine spiritual world. Give heed how it calls in thy soul-wilderness, in thy soul-loneliness.
What is it that announces itself beforehand? Here we must be clear as to the meaning of one quite definite word, when one uses it of soul-phenomena, or of spiritual phenomena in general, above all in the Hebrew, but also in the Greek: the word Kyrios. If one translates it by “the lord,” as generally happens, then one is translating truly absolute nonsense. What is meant by it? Everybody in ancient times, who had such an utterance on his tongue, knew that something was meant thereby which was connected with the soul-progress of the human race. He knew, therefore, that the word “Kyrios” pointed, indeed, to secrets of soul. We have in the soul, when we look to the astral body, various forces. We usually call them thinking, feeling, and willing. The soul thinks, feels, and wills. Those are the three forces that work in the soul. But they are the serving forces of the soul. As man progressed in evolution, these forces which formerly were the lords, to whom man was given over—(man had to wait whether his thinking, feeling, willing was called)—these single soul forces became subject to the Kyrios, the Lord of the soul forces, the “I.” Nothing else was understood by this word, when it referred to the soul, than the “I,” though it no longer held in the old sense: the divine spiritual thinks, feels, wills in me, but I think, I feel, I will: The Lord makes itself valid in the soul forces. Prepare yourselves, ye human souls, to go such soul paths, that ye let the strong “I” awaken in your souls: Kyrios, the Lord in your souls. “Listen, how it calls in the solitude of soul. Prepare the force or the direction of the soul—Lord, of the I. Make open his forces!” Thus one must translate it, approximately. “Make its forces open, so that it can come in, so that it is not the slave of thinking, feeling, and willing.” And if you translate these words: “Behold, that which is the ego, sends its angel before thee, who should give thee the possibility to understand how it calls in the solitude of the astral soul: prepare the directions of the I, make the forces open for it, for the I,” then you have a meaning in these significant words of the prophet Isaiah; then you have an indication of the greatest event in human evolution; thus you understand from this how Isaiah speaks of John the Baptist, how he points out thereby that man's soul-solitude longs for the approach of the Lord in the soul, of the “I.” Then the words get force and weight. Thus, we must grasp such words.
Why could John the Baptist be the bearer of the angel? He could be this, because he had had a quite special initiation, The various initiations are specialised. These initiations are not something general; they are specialised. With those individualities who have a quite special task, an initiation had to occur according to a quite special kind of secret. Now for everything which happens at all in the spiritual world, it is so provided that there is revealed in the heavens, in the starry script what spiritual facts there are. One can receive the sun-initiation, that means, enter the secrets of the spiritual world, which is the world of Ahura Mazdao, for which the sun is the external expression. But one can be initiated into the sun secrets in a twelve-fold way, and each initiation is in a certain connection a Sun-Initiation, but yet is differently constituted with reference to the other eleven. According as man has this or the other task for the whole of mankind, he receives a sun-initiation of which one can say: This is a sun-initiation but such that one must express by saying: The forces flow in so that the sun stands in the sign of Cancer. That is different from the initiation one receives which one must express by saying: The forces flow in as if the sun stands in the sign of the Balance or Scales. They are the expressions for different specialised initiations. And those individualities who have such a high task, a high mission, as characterised here for John the Baptist, they must be initiated in a quite special manner in a special initiation, because only from this can they get the strong force necessary to bring about this mission in the world, also, under conditions in a quite one-sided way. And so, John the Baptist, in order that he could become the bearer of the Angelos, had that sun-initiation, which one can call the initiation from the sign of the Waterman. As the sun stands in the sign of the Waterman, that is a symbol for that kind of initiation which John the Baptist received, in order to become the bearer of the angel, while he received the force of the sun, as it flows down when it stands in the sign of the Waterman, when it stands in such a relation to the other stars, that one designates it with the expression: It stands in the sign of the Waterman. That was the symbol that John had the Waterman-initiation. The sign indeed received this name Waterman, because he who had the Waterman-initiation received especially the power as a spiritual initiate, of effecting in human beings what John effected as the Waterman, as the Baptist: namely, to bring human beings to this, that with the immersion in water, they got their etheric bodies so free, that they came to such a self-knowledge, which made possible what was the most important thing at the time. Human beings were immersed, and the etheric body became free for a moment. Through the baptism in the Jordan, man could feel the quite especial importance of the world-historic epoch. Therefore John was initiated just in the Baptism Initiation. And because one must express that symbolically, with the flowing-down of the sunrays out of the sign in which the sun stands, so one called this sign also—the Waterman. Thus the name of the human power is carried over.
Today a whole number of learned ignoramuses make the attempt to interpret spiritual events by bringing down the heaven, as it were, to the earth. They say: Now, that signifies the prominence of the sun. All these learned people, who really do not know much, interpret human events from out of the heavens. The reverse was the case. What lives in man spiritually was carried over to the heavens, while one made use of the heavens as a means of expression. So that John the Baptist could say: I am he who baptises you with water. And that was the same as if he had said: I am endowed with the initiation of the Waterman. I baptise you with water, I am endowed with the initiation of the Waterman. That was the word which John would have been able to say to his intimate disciples. And just as the sun progresses in opposition to its sense-path: if you proceed in opposition to Waterman, there arises—Virgin; then it passes to Balance. If we have initiation in mind, we must consider the opposite path, on the other side: from Waterman to Fishes. Thus John could say: Something will come that no longer has to work as corresponds to the sun from out of the Waterman, but as corresponds to the working of the sun from out of the Fishes. One will come who will bring a higher baptism. When the spiritual sun mounts higher, then there arises from the Waterman-baptism, the baptism from spiritual water. The sun ascends in spirit from Waterman to the Fishes: hence the well-known fish-symbol for the bearer of the Christ, which is an ancient symbol. For just as in John through quite special spiritual influences a Waterman initiation took place, so the initiation, of which I have spoken here and there to you, which arose through all mysteries in a secret way which transpired around Jesus, a Fish-initiation—a progression of the sun by one constellation. That was what placed Jesus of Nazareth in his age, that he was first subject to a Fish-initiation.
This is, one might say, sufficiently indicated to us in the gospel of Mark. Yet such things can only be indicated in image form. Christ Jesus draws together all those who are seeking fish. Therefore all his first apostles are fishermen. And we can find obvious what I have said—the progress to the Fishes, when we are told: I have baptised you with water. He will baptise you with the Holy Spirit. And as he drew to the sea of Galilee—that means, when the sun was so far advanced, that one could see its counterpart from the Fishes—those are inspired who were called Simon, and Simon's brother, James, and James' brother, fishers—they are inspired in the corresponding way. How can we understand all that? We cannot understand it, unless we enter a little more closely into the means of expression of that time.
Our modern means of expression is pedantic. If a man stands before us, we say: there is a man. If a second stands before us, we say again: there is a man. A third—another one, etc. But we have merely Maya before us. If a being has two legs, and a human countenance, then in our pedantic way of expression we have but the one word: there is a man. But what is a man for occultism? Nothing but Maya! Really, as he stands there before us, man is—nothing. He is about as much as the rainbow which stands in the sky. How long is this anything? Only so long as the necessary conditions are given between rain and sunshine. If the sun and rain alter their relationship, it is gone. It is just the same with man. He is only a streaming together of forces of the macrocosm. We must seek the forces in heaven, here or there in the macrocosm. There, where one assumes perhaps a man somewhere on the earth, there is nothing for the occultist. But forces are streaming from above down, from below up, and they intersect. And as the peculiar constellation of rain and sunshine results in the rainbow, so forces streaming out of the macrocosm from above and below result in a phenomenon, and this appears as man. That is the man. Man is nothing as he stands before us. In truth, he is a schema, a Maya, an illusion. It is the cosmic forces which are real, which intersect there where our eyes think they see a man. Just try and take this expression earnestly: Man is nothing as he stands before us. He is but the shadow of many forces. The being, however, who reveals itself in man, can quite well be elsewhere, than at that point where this man is walking on two legs. There are three men: The one is an ancient Persian, who works at the plough in the old Persian agriculture. He looks like a man—in truth he is one of the souls, who are nourishing their forces out of this or that world from below or above. The second is perhaps an old Persian official. He is built through forces from another world which intersect in him. If we will know him, we must mount to these forces. All of you, as you are sitting here, are in your reality quite somewhere else. Only the forces from your own real being ray here.... Then stood a third Persian there, of whom one had to say: He is really utter deception—he is utterly a schema, which stands there. What was there in reality? One must go up to the sun, there are the forces which nourished this model. There above, among the secrets of the sun, one finds that which one can call the Gold Star—Zarathustra; that sends the rays down, and here below stands a model, which one calls Zarathustra. In truth, his being is not there at all. That is the third.
Now it is important that in ancient times one was aware of what was meant by such designations. One did not give names as one does today, but one named people according to what lived in them, not according to their external illusory appearance. We must be quite clear of this. So that one should have been able to say: An ancient human being at the time of Christ should have well understood when one pointed to John the Baptist, and said: Here is the angel of God. One would only have heeded that which had taken up the place. One spoke of the chief matter, not of the subsidiary ones. Now let us assume the same mode of expression was applied to Christ Jesus Himself. How must one have spoken of Christ Jesus if one understood such things? No man at that time would even have dreamt of naming that which then wandered over the earth, this wandering body in flesh, the Christ Jesus; but that was the sign, that what streamed down spiritually from out of the sun, was caught up in this point in a quite special manner. If this body, which was the body of Jesus, went from one place to another, that was the rendering visible of the sun-force which went from one place to another. This sun-force could also go alone. At times the expression was so used, that Christ Jesus was in his home in the flesh, but what was in him moved further, even without his body. Especially in the John Gospel the expression is so used, that under conditions, when this being moved purely spiritually, the writer of the gospel speaks quite exactly as if this sun-force dwelt in a fleshly body. Hence it is so important that the deeds of Christ Jesus are always brought into connection with the physical sun, which is the external expression for the spiritual world, which has been collected, been caught up, at that point where the fleshly body wanders. If thus the Christ Jesus heals, for instance, then it is the sun-force which heals there. This must stand, however, at the right place in the heavens. “When evening was come, as the sun went down, they brought to him all who were sick, diseased, etc.” It is important that one indicates that this healing power can flow down when the external sun has set, when the sun only still works spiritually. And as He needs a definite force in order to work, he had to take this out of the spiritual sun, not out of the physical visible sun. “And early in the morning, while it was still dark, he arose and went out.” The path of the sun, and the sun-force is expressly indicated to us: that this sun-force works, and that fundamentally Jesus is only the external sign: that this path of the sun-force could also be visible to the weak external eyes. And everywhere in the Mark Gospel where we have mention of the Christ, the sun-force is meant, which for that epoch of our earthly evolution was quite especially active on that part of the earth called Palestine. And one could see the sun-force. “At this or that time, Christ went from this place to that place.” One could just as well say: “At this time, the spiritual force of the sun, as if gathered into a focus, went from this to that place,” And the body of Jesus was the external sign which made visible to the eyes how the sun-force moved. The paths of Jesus in Palestine were the paths of the sun-force come down to earth. And if you draw the steps of Jesus as on a special map, then you have a cosmic event; the working of the sun-force out of the macrocosm in the land of Palestine. It is a question of this macrocosmic event. It is especially the writer of the Mark Gospel who points this to us; the writer of the Mark Gospel, who well knew that a body, which was the vehicle of such a principle as the Christ-Principle, must be subdued in a quite special way by his principle. It was the pointing to that world which Zarathustra had so powerfully announced behind the world of sense, the pointing to that world as it works into the human world. And so now there was indicated through Christ Jesus how the forces work on into the earth. Therefore a kind of repetition of the Zarathustra-events must occur in that body which, as we have seen, even if it was the body of the Nathan Jesus, was in a certain way influenced by the Zarathustra Individuality.
Now let us hear the great, beautiful legends of Zarathustra. As his mother gave him birth, the first wonder of Zarathustra showed itself as the famous Zarathustra smile. The second wonder was when the king of the district where Zarathustra was born, Durasrav, resolved to murder Zarathustra, of whom the decadent magicians had said special things. As the king appeared to stab the child, his arm was paralysed. That was the second miracle after the birth of Zarathustra. And then, the king who could not use his dagger against Zarathustra, had the child taken among the wild beasts of the desert. That is the expression for the fact that in earliest childhood, Zarathustra had to see what man sees when he appears impure. Instead of the noble group-souls, and the noble, higher spiritual beings, he sees the outflow of his wild fantasy. That is the exposure in the desert to the wild animals, among which Zarathustra remains unharmed. That is the third miracle. The fourth was again a miracle among the wild animals, etc. Always it was the good spirit of Ahura Mazdao who served Zarathustra.
We find these wonders again in the Mark Gospel repeated: “And then the Spirit drove him into the wilderness—(really it means solitude)—for forty days... and the angels ministered unto him.” Here we are shown that the body was prepared to take up, as it were, in a focus, that which transpired in the macrocosm. What happened with Zarathustra must happen again; being led to the wild beasts.... This body took up what came in from out of the macrocosm.
The Mark Gospel already in its first lines places us within the greatest cosmic connections. And I wanted to show you how basically, if one but first understands the words in the right sense—not as in our modern pedantic speech, but as in the ancient speech, where each word had living worlds behind it—when one understands it in the sense of this ancient speech, how then the Mark Gospel gets new life, new force. But one must say: Our modern speech can only find what was already laid in the words in these ancient speeches, after much paraphrase. What we utter when we say: “Man lives on the earth and develops his ego. Man formerly lived on the moon, then it was the angels who went through their human stage.” All of that lies behind, when it runs: “Behold, I send my angel before man.” And the words are not to be understood, without the presupposition of what is offered in spiritual science. And people in the present should be sincere, and say of the words at the beginning of the Mark Gospel: That is incomprehensible. Instead of doing this, they stand there in petty pride and explain spiritual science as fantasy, which puts all kinds of things into what they know in a simple way. But these people of today do not know it at all. And today one no longer has the principle that one had, for instance, in ancient Persia, where from epoch to epoch, the ancient holy documents were rewritten, in order to be clothed anew for each epoch. Thus the divine spiritual word as Zend-Avesta was transformed, and again transformed, and what exists today is the last form. Seven times the Persian Bible was written anew. And anthroposophy should teach men how necessary it is that books in which the holy secrets are written must be transformed from age to age. For especially when one will preserve the mighty style of old, one may not as it were attempt to remain as much as possible with the old words. One cannot do it, one understands them no more, but one must attempt to transform the ancient words into a direct understanding of the present. We have tried this summer to do that with Genesis.1Secrets of Creation. A series of lectures on the Book of Genesis delivered by the author at Munich, August, 1910, now out of print, but to be reprinted shortly in a second and revised edition. You saw, then, how many of the words must be transformed. You have perhaps today got a little idea of how the words must also be transformed in the Gospel of Mark.
Elfter Vortrag
Im Laufe der Jahre sind in den verschiedenen Zweigen bei den verschiedenen Kursen, jedenfalls auch vor einem großen Teile der anthroposophischen Freunde, die hier sitzen, Betrachtungen über das Johannes-Evangelium, das Lukas-Evangelium, das Matthäus-Evangelium angestellt worden, und wir haben versucht, bei diesen Betrachtungen über die drei Evangelien vor unser geistiges Auge treten zu lassen von drei verschiedenen Seiten aus, gleichsam auf drei verschiedene Arten, das große Ereignis von Palästina, das Mysterium von Golgatha. Und es sind diese Betrachtungen vielleicht doch geeignet gewesen, eine immer steigende Hochschätzung dieser einzigartigen Ereignisse in unserer Seele zu begründen. Wir haben ja auch schon darauf aufmerksam gemacht, wie der Grund, warum wir vier Evangelien haben, im wesentlichen doch darin zu suchen ist, daß die Evangelienschreiber als inspirierte Okkultisten darstellen wollten das große Ereignis, jeder sozusagen von einer Seite aus, wie man irgend etwas Äußerliches abbildet oder photographiert von einem Standpunkte aus. Und wenn man Aufnahmen eines Dinges macht von verschiedenen Seiten her, so kann man durch Kombinationen dessen, was die Aufnahmen ergeben können, gleichsam durch Zusammenschauen vor die Seele rücken, was eigentliche Wirklichkeit, Realität ist. Jeder der Evangelisten gibt uns eigentlich Anlaß, das große Ereignis von Palästina von einer ganz besonderen Seite her zu betrachten.
Von einer Seite her, die wir zugleich nennen können die Eröffnung der höchsten menschlichen, okkulten und sonstigen Ziele, und neben diesem höchsten Menschlichen auch berücksichtigend das höchste Weltenprinzip, von dieser Seite her gibt uns das Johannes-Evangelium einen Einblick in die großen Ereignisse von Palästina.
Das Lukas-Evangelium eröffnet uns einen Ausblick auf die Geheimnisse, welche die Persönlichkeit des Jesus von Nazareth, des salomonischen und des nathanischen Jesus, umschweben bis zu dem Moment, da die große Inspiration des Jesus von Nazareth durch den Christus eingetreten ist.
Das Matthäus-Evangelium hat für diejenigen, die den Zyklus entweder gehört haben, als er vorgetragen wurde, oder die ihn später lesen werden, zu zeigen, wie sozusagen aus dem Volkstum des alten Hebräertums heraus, aus den Volksgeheimnissen des hebräischen Volkes heraus, sich vorbereitet sozusagen das physische Leibesprinzip, in welches inkarniert werden sollte für drei Jahre das ChristusPrinzip.
In einer gewissen Beziehung ist nun eigentlich wiederum das Markus-Evangelium dasjenige, das uns in die höchsten Höhen geisteswissenschaftlicher christlicher Betrachtungsweise führen kann, und durch das Markus-Evangelium wird uns Gelegenheit geboten, in manches hineinzuschauen, was uns mitgeteilt werden soll gerade durch die Evangelien, was uns aber durch die anderen Evangelien nicht in solcher Weise nahegebracht wird, wie eben durch das Markus-Evangelium. Und einige Worte, weil gerade die Gelegenheit noch ist, in Anknüpfung an das Markus-Evangelium heute schon zu Ihnen zu sprechen, das habe ich mir für diesen Abend zur Aufgabe gesetzt.
Nun müssen wir allerdings, wenn wir darüber sprechen, uns klar werden, wie sehr es notwendig ist, in mancherlei hineinzublicken, in das hineinzublicken die oberflächliche Welt der Gegenwart keine rechte Neigung hat. Wenn man das Markus-Evangelium und alle seine Tiefen verstehen soll, dann muß man sich bekanntmachen mit der ganz andersartigen Ausdrucksweise des Menschen zu der Zeit, als der Christus Jesus noch auf Erden wandelte. Nehmen Sie es mir nicht übel, wenn ich versuche, durch eine deutliche Schattierung, ein deutliches Helldunkel, Ihnen das zu sagen, was ich Ihnen eigentlich mit diesem sagen will.
Wir drücken durch die Sprache das aus, was wir eben sagen wollen, und in den Worten der Sprache soll das in einer gewissen Weise veranschaulicht werden, was in unserer Seele lebt. In der Art, durch die Sprache auszudrücken, was in unserer Seele lebt, unterscheiden sich die verschiedenen Epochen der Menschheitsentwickelung gar sehr. Und wenn wir zurückgehen würden in die Epoche der althebräischen Entwickelung, zu jener wunderbaren Ausdrucksweise, die noch möglich war in der althebräischen Tempelsprache, da würden wir eine ganz andere Art finden, die Geheimnisse unserer Seele in Worte zu kleiden, als die Menschen heute auch nur ahnen. Wenn ein Wort angeschlagen wurde in der althebräischen Sprache - es wurden ja nur die Konsonanten geschrieben, die Vokale wurden dann ergänzt -, so tönte in dieses Wort hinein nicht nur das, was heute hineintönt, ein ziemlich abstrakter Begriff, sondern eine ganze Welt. Und gerade deshalb wurden die Vokale nicht eigentlich ausgeschrieben, weil derjenige, der das sprach, gerade in der Art und Weise der Vokalisierung sein Innerstes gab, während in den Konsonanten mehr die Schilderung, die Abmalung dessen, was draußen ist, lag. Man darf sagen, daß zum Beispiel ein alter Hebräer, wenn er ein B hinzeichnete - das, was unserem heutigen B entspricht -, immer so etwas fühlte wie eine Abmalung von äußeren Verhältnissen, von etwas, das eine warme, hüttenartige Umschließung bildet. Der Buchstabe B rief immer hervor das Bild von etwas, was hausartig ein Wesen umschließen kann. Man konnte das B nicht aussprechen, ohne daß das in der Seele lebte. Und wenn man ein A vokalisierte, so konnte man das nicht, ohne daß in dem A etwas lebte von Stärke, von Kraft, ja selbst von hinstrahlender Kraft. So lebte die Seele weiter; es schwebte der Seeleninhalt mit den Worten hinaus und schwebte weiter in den Raum und schwebte zu den anderen Seelen hin. Also es war eine viel lebendigere Sache, das Sprachliche. Es ging viel mehr auf die Geheimnisse des Daseins ein als unsere Sprache.
Das ist das Licht, das ich Ihnen hinmalen möchte. Und den Schatten möchte ich dagegenstellen: daß wir in unserer Zeit in dieser Beziehung in hohem Grade Philister geworden sind. Unsere Sprache drückt nur noch Abstrakta, Allgemeinheiten aus. Das fühlen die Menschen gar nicht mehr. Sie drückt wirklich im Grunde genommen nur mehr Philiströses aus. Wie sollte es auch anders sein in einer Zeit, wo die Menschen anfangen, die Sprache sogar schriftstellerisch zu handhaben, lange bevor sie einen geistigen Inhalt haben; in einer Zeit, wo so unendlich viel als Druckware in die breite Masse hineingeht, wo jeder glaubt, etwas schreiben zu müssen, wo alles zum Gegenstand des Schreibens genommen wird. Ich habe erleben müssen, daß sich bei der Gründung unserer Gesellschaft Schriftsteller aus Neugierde einfanden, die die Absicht gehabt haben, vielleicht nur einen Roman herausziehen zu können aus dieser Sache. Warum sollte es da nicht Gestalten geben, die man verzapfen kann in öffentlicher Schriftstellerei? Also wir müssen uns klar sein, daß wir im Gegensatz zu der Art und Weise, wie man über Sprache dachte als über etwas Heiliges, demgegenüber man die Verantwortung hat, daß der Gott daraus sprechen soll -, daß wir eine Sprache haben, die abstrakt, leer, philiströs geworden ist. Daher ist es so unendlich schwierig, jene großen, gewaltigen Tatsachen, die uns mitgeteilt werden und anklingen zum Beispiel in den Evangelien, in heutige Worte hineinzupressen. Warum sollte auch der heutige Mensch nicht glauben, daß man alles in unserer Sprache geben kann! Er kann nicht verstehen, daß unsere Sprache irgend etwas sagt, was leer ist gegenüber dem, was selbst noch die griechische Sprache mit einem Worte meinte. Und wenn wir heute die Bibel lesen, lesen wir etwas, was gegenüber dem ursprünglichen Inhalte einmal gesiebt, zweimal gesiebt, dreimal gesiebt ist, aber so gesiebt ist, daß nicht das Beste, sondern daß immer das Schlechteste bleibt. Daher ist es natürlich billig, sich in einer gewissen Weise auf die heutigen Worte der Bibel zu berufen. Aber am schlechtesten kommen wir weg, wenn wir uns beim Markus-Evangelium auf die Bibel berufen, wie sie uns heute vorliegt. Das dürfen wir auf keinen Fall.
Nun wissen Sie, daß das Markus-Evangelium bei den ersten Worten zur Grundlage die Worte hat, welche die als vorzüglich geltende Übersetzung von Weizsäcker, die aber - man könnte sich das schon denken, weil sie eben heute als so vorzüglich angesehen wird — gar nicht so vorzüglich ist, folgendermaßen gibt: «Wie geschrieben steht in dem Propheten Jesajas: Siehe, ich sende meinen Boten vor dir her, der soll dir den Weg bereiten. Hört, wie es ruft in der Wüste: bereitet den Weg des Herrn, macht eben seine Pfade.»
Ehrliche Menschen müßten im Grunde genommen, wenn das Markus-Evangelium in dieser Weizsäckerschen Übersetzung so beginnt, sich sagen: Ich verstehe von alledem kein Wort, denn der, der das verstehen will, muß sich etwas vormachen. Wer ehrlich zu Werke geht, kann gar nichts verstehen, wenn gesagt wird: «Siehe, ich sende meinen Boten vor dir her, der soll dir den Weg bereiten, hört, wie es ruft in der Wüste: bereitet den Weg des Herrn, macht eben seine Pfade.» Denn entweder ist eine Trivialität gesagt, oder aber es ist irgend etwas gesagt, was man nicht verstehen kann. Nun muß man allerdings erst die Begriffe zusammentragen, die es möglich machen, zu verstehen einen solchen Ausspruch, wie der des Jesajas hier ist. Denn Jesajas wies hin auf das große gewaltige Ereignis, das das bedeutsamste Ereignis der Menschheitsentwickelung sein sollte. Auf was wies er eigentlich hin? Nun, wir können aus dem, was wir schon beschrieben haben, sehr wohl auf das hindeuten, was Jesajas voraussagte; wir können hindeuten, indem wir sagen:
In uralten Zeiten hatte der Mensch eine Art Hellsehen. Er hatte eine Möglichkeit, hineinzuwachsen mit seinen Seelenkräften in die geistig-göttliche Welt. Was war denn eigentlich mit dem Menschen der Fall, wenn er also hineinwuchs in die göttlich-geistige Welt? Das war der Fall, wenn er hineinwuchs in die göttlich-geistige Welt, daß er aufhörte, sein «Ich» zu gebrauchen, soweit es dazumal schon entwickelt war; er gebrauchte seinen astralischen Leib, und in diesem waren die Kräfte, welche Seherkräfte, Schaukräfte waren, während alle die Kräfte, die im Ich sitzen, an der Wahrnehmung der physischen Welt zunächst allmählich erweckt wurden. Das Ich ist es, das sich der sinnlichen Werkzeuge bedient. Der alte Mensch gebrauchte aber, wenn er Aufklärung sich verschaffen wollte über die Welt, seinen astralischen Leib. Also im Astralleib sah, nahm wahr der alte Mensch. Und darin besteht die Fortentwickelung, daß Sie finden den Übergang vom Astralleib zum Gebrauch des Ich. Und in bezug auf dieses Ich sollte der Christus-Impuls der intensivste Impuls sein. Wenn aufgenommen werden sollte in das Ich der Christus so, daß das Wort des Paulus wahr ist: Nicht ich, sondern der Christus in mir, — dann hat das Ich die Kraft, hineinzuwachsen in die geistige Welt durch sich selber. Früher konnte dies nur der Astralleib.
So haben wir eine Entwickelung der Menschheit also vor uns, so, daß wir sagen können: Der Mensch gebrauchte als Erkenntnisorgan seinen Astralleib, und immer mehr und mehr verlor er im Astralleib die Möglichkeit, überhaupt ein Erkenntnisorgan darin zu entwickeln. Es gab, gerade eben je mehr man sich dem Christus-Ereignis näherte, die Entwickelungsstufe, daß der Mensch sich sagen mußte: Mein Astralleib hat immer weniger und weniger die Möglichkeit, in die geistige Welt hineinzuschauen. Es wurde nichts mehr mit seiner Verbindung mit der geistigen Welt, und das Ich war noch nicht kraftvoll genug, um seinerseits irgend etwas an Aufklärung aus der Welt zu bekommen. Das war das Zeitalter, wo Christus sozusagen herannahte.
Nun handelt es sich in der wirklichen Entwickelung der Menschheit darum, daß gewisse große Fortschritte nach und nach vorbereitet werden und dann eben eintreten. So war es auch beim Christus-Impuls. Es mußte aber einen Übergang geben. Es konnte die Sache nicht so verlaufen, daß der Mensch sah, wie sein Astralleib nach und nach stumpf für die geistige Welt wurde, so daß er vollständige Öde und Wüstheit in sich gefühlt hätte, bis das Ich entzündet wurde durch den Christus-Impuls. So durfte es doch nicht kommen. Sondern bei einigen geschah es so, daß sie durch einen besonderen Einfluß der geistigen Welt schon im Astralleib etwas Ähnliches sahen, wie man es später durch das Ich erkennen und sehen sollte. Es wurde im Astralleib sozusagen die Ichheit vorbereitet. Das war eine Vorausnahme der Ichheit im Astralleib. Der Mensch war ja erst durch das Ich und durch seine Entwickelung Erdenmensch geworden. Der Astralleib gehörte eigentlich dem alten Monde an. Dazumal war der Angelos, der Engelmensch, auf der Menschheitsstufe. Der Engel war auf dem alten Mond Mensch, auf der Erde ist der Mensch Mensch. Das wissen wir. Für den Menschen schickte es sich auf dem Monde, seinen Astralleib zu gebrauchen. Alles übrige war nur Vorbereitung für die IchEntwickelung. Der Anfang unserer Erdenentwickelung war ein Wiederholen der Mondenentwickelung. Denn im astralischen Leib konnte der Mensch überhaupt nie völlig Mensch werden, sondern es konnte nur der Engel auf dem Monde Mensch werden im astralischen Leib. Ebenso wie im Erdenmenschen, um das Ich zu inspirieren, der Christus lebte, mußte daher zur Vorbereitung dieser Ichheit die Möglichkeit sein, daß von den Engeln des Mondes, von den Mondmenschen also, den Angeloi, Propheten da waren, die den Astralleib des Menschen inspirierten, damit sich die Ichheit schon vorbereiten konnte. Es mußte also das eintreten, was etwa ein Prophet so hätte charakterisieren können: Es wird in der Menschheitsentwickelung ein Zeitpunkt kommen, da wird die Menschheit reif werden zur Ich-Entwickelung. Im Astralleib haben sich zum Höchsten erhoben bloß die Angeloi des Mondes. Damit aber der Mensch vorbereitet werden kann zu dieser Ichheit, müssen gewisse Menschen, die das durch Gnade in Ausnahmezuständen erfahren, so inspiriert werden auf der Erde, daß sie wie Engel wirken, trotzdem sie Menschen sind, daß sie Engel in Menschengestalt sind.
Da kommen wir zu einem wichtigen okkulten Begriff, ohne den Sie überhaupt nicht verstehen können die Entwickelung der Menschheit im Sinne des Okkultismus. Äußerlich gesagt, ist es natürlich leicht, wenn man einfach davon spricht, daß alles Maya ist. Aber das ist ein Abstraktum. Das muß man wirklich ernst nehmen. Daher muß man sagen können: Nun ja, da steht ein Mensch vor mir, der ist aber Maya — wer weiß, ist der überhaupt ein Mensch? Vielleicht ist das Menschsein nur die äußere Hülle, und es benützt ein ganz anderes Wesen, als der Mensch es ist, diese äußere Hülle, um gerade etwas zu bewirken, was durch den Menschen noch nicht bewirkt werden kann. — Ich habe etwas davon angedeutet in meiner «Pforte der Einweihung».
In der Vorzeit wurde ein solches Ereignis aktuell für die Menschheit, als die Individualität, die im alten Elias gelebt hatte, in Johannes dem Täufer wiedergeboren wurde, und als in die Seele des Johannes des Täufers für seine damalige Inkarnation ein Engel einfuhr und die Leiblichkeit und auch die Seelenhaftigkeit Johannes’ des Täufers benützte, um das zu bewirken, was kein Mensch hätte bewirken können. In Johannes lebt ein Angelos, der vorherzugehen und vorherzuverkündigen hat, was als wahre Ichheit im umfassendsten Sinne in Jesus von Nazareth leben sollte. Das ist außerordentlich wichtig zu wissen, daß Johannes der Täufer eine Maya ist und in ihm ein Angelos, ein Bote lebt. Im Griechischen steht auch: Siehe, ich sende meinen Boten, Angelos, Engel. - Daran denkt nur der Deutsche nicht mehr, daß im Griechischen an dieser Stelle Angelos steht: Siehe, ich sende meinen Engel vor ihm her. - Es ist also hingedeutet auf ein tiefes Weltermysterium, das mit dem Täufer vorgegangen ist, das Jesajas vorausgesagt hat. Er charakterisiert den Johannes den Täufer als eine Maya, als eine Illusion, ihn, der in Wahrheit umschließt den Engel, den Angelos, der als Engel zu verkündigen hat, was der Mensch eigentlich werden soll durch die Aufnahme des Christus-Impulses, weil Engel vorher verkündigen müssen, was der Mensch erst später werden soll. Zu sagen wäre also an dieser Stelle: Siehe, das, was der Welt die Ichheit gibt, sendet den Angelos vor dir, dem die Ichheit gegeben werden soll, her.
Jetzt gehen wir zu dem dritten Satz. Was bedeutet er? Da muß man sich einmal die ganze welthistorische Situation vergegenwärtigen. Wie war es denn geworden in der Menschenbrust, da der Astralleib allmählich die Fähigkeit verloren hatte, seine Kräfte wie Fangarme auszustrecken und hellscherisch in die göttlich-geistige Welt hineinzuschauen? Früher, wenn der Astralleib in Tätigkeit versetzt worden war, konnte er hineinschauen in die göttlich-geistige Welt. Jetzt verschwand allmählich immer mehr und mehr diese Möglichkeit, und dunkel wurde es im Menschen. Der Mensch konnte früher ausbreiten seinen Astralleib über all die Wesenheiten der göttlichgeistigen Welt. Jetzt war er in sich einsam — einsam ist gleich &onuog. In der Einsamkeit lebte jetzt das, was Menschenseele war. Das steht auch da noch im griechischen Text: Siehe, wie es sich ausnimmt, wie es da drinnen spricht in der Einsamkeit der Seele -— meinetwillen sagen Sie, in der Wüstheit der Seele -, als der Astralleib sich nicht mehr ausbreiten konnte zu der göttlich-geistigen Welt. Höre hin, wie es ruft in deiner Seelenwüste, in deiner Seeleneinsamkeit.
Was aber verkündet sich voraus? Da müssen wir uns jetzt klar werden, was ein ganz bestimmtes Wort bedeutete, wenn man es gebrauchte von Seelenerscheinungen, von geistigen Erscheinungen überhaupt, vor allen Dingen im Hebräischen, aber auch noch im Griechischen: das Wort Kyrios. Wenn man das übersetzt mit «der Herr», wie das gewöhnlich geschieht, so übersetzt man einen wahrhaftigen knüppeldicken Unsinn. Was ist damit gemeint? Jeder in alten Zeiten, der einen solchen Ausspruch in den Mund nahm, wußte, daß damit etwas gemeint ist, was mit dem Seelenfortschritt des Menschengeschlechtes zusammenhängt. Daher wußte er, daß das Wort Kyrios hindeutete auch auf Seelengeheimnisse. Wir haben in der Seele, wenn wir auf den Astralleib blicken, verschiedene Kräfte. Denken, Fühlen und Wollen nennen wir sie gewöhnlich. Die Seele denkt, fühlt, will. Das sind die drei Kräfte, die in der Seele wirken. Aber es sind die dienenden Kräfte der Seele. Indem der Mensch fortschritt in der Entwickelung, wurden diese Kräfte, die früher die Herren waren, denen der Mensch hingegeben war - denn der Mensch mußte warten, ob sein Denken, Fühlen, Wollen gerufen wurde -, diese einzelnen Seelenkräfte wurden unterstellt dem Kyrios, dem Herrn der Seelenkräfte, dem Ich. Und nichts anderes wurde verstanden unter dem Wort, wenn es auf die Seele bezüglich war, als das Ich, das nun nicht mehr im alten Sinne festhielt: das GöttlichGeistige denkt, fühlt, will in mir, sondern: ich denke, ich fühle, ich will - der Herr macht sich geltend in den Seelenkräften. Bereitet euch vor, ihr Menschenseelen, solche Seelenwege zu gehen, daß ihr in eurer Seele erwecken laßt das starke Ich, Kyrios, den Herrn in eurer Seele. Hört, wie es ruft in der Seeleneinsamkeit. Bereitet die Kraft oder die Richtung des Seelenherrn, des Ich. Macht offen seine Kräfte! - So muß man ungefähr übersetzen: macht offen, daß es hereinkommen kann, daß es nicht der Sklave von Denken, Fühlen und Wollen ist, macht offen seine Kräfte! Und wenn Sie übersetzen diese Worte: Siehe, das, was die Ichheit ist, sendet her vor dir seinen Engel, der soll dir die Möglichkeit geben, zu verstehen, wie es ruft in der Einsamkeit der astralischen Seele; bereitet die Richtungen des Ich, macht offen für es, für das Ich, die Kräfte! — so haben Sie einen Sinn in diesen bedeutsamen Worten des Propheten Jesajas; so haben Sie den Hinweis auf das größte Ereignis der Menschheitsentwickelung; so verstehen Sie daraus, wie Jesajas von Johannes dem Täufer spricht, wie er hinweist darauf, daß die Menschenseeleneinsamkeit sich sehnt nach der Herankunft des Herrn in der Seele, des Ich. Und jetzt werden erst die Worte zu Mark und Erz, und so müssen wir, solche Worte auffassen.
Und warum konnte Johannes der Täufer der Träger des Angelos sein? Er konnte es sein, weil er eine ganz bestimmte Initiation hatte. Die Initiationen spezialisieren sich nämlich. Diese Initiationen sind nicht etwas Allgemeines, sie spezialisieren sich. Bei denjenigen Individualitäten, die eine ganz besondere Aufgabe haben, muß eine Initiation eintreten nach einer ganz bestimmten Art. Nun ist für alles das, was überhaupt in der geistigen Welt vorgeht, vorgesorgt, so daß wirklich am Himmel sich in Sternenschrift das zeigt, was eigentlich geistige Tatsachen sind. Man kann die Sonnen-Initiation empfangen, das heißt in die Geheimnisse der geistigen Welt eintreten, die die Welt des Ahura Mazdao ist, für die die Sonne der äußere Ausdruck ist. Aber man kann auf zwölferlei Art eingeweiht werden in die SonnenGeheimnisse, und jede Initiation ist in gewisser Beziehung eine Sonnen-Initiation, aber sie ist doch verschieden ausgestaltet in bezug auf die anderen elf. Je nachdem der Mensch nun diese oder jene Aufgabe für die gesamte Menschheit hat, bekommt er eine Initiation, von der man sagen kann: Dies ist eine Sonnen-Initiation, aber eine solche, die man so ausdrücken muß, daß man sagt, die Kräfte fließen so hinein, als wenn die Sonne im Zeichen des Krebses steht. Das ist anders, als wenn man eine Sonnen-Initiation empfängt, die man ausdrücken muß, indem man sagt: Die Kräfte fließen so hinein, wie wenn die Sonne im Zeichen der Waage steht. Das sind die Ausdrücke für verschieden spezialisierte Initiationen. Und diejenigen Individualitäten eben, die eine so hohe Aufgabe, eine so hohe Mission haben wie die hier für Johannes den Täufer charakterisierte, müssen in ganz besonderer Weise in eine Spezial-Initiation eingeweiht sein, weil sie ja nur aus dieser heraus die starke Kraft haben können, um auch unter Umständen in ganz einseitiger Weise diese Mission in der Welt durchzuführen. Und da hatte denn Johannes der Täufer, damit er der Träger des Angelos werden konnte, diejenige Sonnen-Initiation, die man nennen kann die Initiation aus dem Zeichen des Wassermanns heraus. So wie die Sonne im Zeichen des Wassermanns steht, so ist das ein Symbolum für die Art der Initiation, die Johannes der Täufer bekommen hatte, um der Träger des Engels zu werden, indem er die Kraft der Sonne aufnahm, wie sie eben zufließt, wenn sie so steht zu den anderen Sternen, daß man es bezeichnet mit dem Ausdruck: Sie steht im Zeichen des Wassermanns. Das war das Symbolum. Johannes hatte die Wassermann-Initiation. Das Zeichen bekam sogar den Namen Wassermann, weil derjenige, der die Wassermann-Initiation hatte, als geistige Einweihung ganz besonders die Fähigkeit hatte, dasjenige mit dem Menschen vorzunehmen, was Johannes als der «Wassermann», als der Täufer vornahm: nämlich die Menschen wirklich dazu zu bringen, daß sie mit dem Untertauchen unter das Wasser ihren Ätherleib soweit frei bekamen, daß sie zu einer solchen Selbsterkenntnis kamen, die es möglich macht, einzusehen, was in der betreffenden Zeit das Wichtigste ist. Die Menschen wurden untergetaucht, und da wurde frei für einen Moment der Ätherleib. Durch die Jordantaufe konnte der Mensch die ganz besondere Wichtigkeit dieser welthistorischen Epoche empfinden. Deshalb war Johannes eingeweiht in eben die Tauf-Initiation. Und weil man das symbolisch ausdrücken muß mit dem Herfließen der Sonnenstrahlen aus dem Zeichen, in dem die Sonne steht, so nannte man dieses Zeichen auch den Wassermann. So ist die Benennung von der menschlichen Fähigkeit hinauf übertragen. Heute machen eine ganze Anzahl gelehrter Nichtswisser den Versuch, sagen wir, die geistigen Ereignisse zu deuten, indem sie sozusagen den Himmel auf die Erde heruntertragen. Sie sagen: Nun, das bedeutet das Vorrücken der Sonne. — Alle gelehrten Herren, die im Grunde genommen nichts wissen, die deuten aus dem Himmel herein die Menschheitsereignisse. Umgekehrt war es: Was geistig im Menschen lebt, wurde auf den Himmel übertragen, indem man den Himmel als Ausdrucksmittel benutzte. So daß Johannes der Täufer sagen konnte: Ich bin der, der euch mit Wasser tauft. - Und das war dasselbe, wie wenn er gesagt hätte: Ich taufe euch mit Wasser, ich bin versehen mit der Initiation des Wassermanns. — Das wäre das Wort gewesen, das Johannes der Täufer hätte zu seinen intimen Schülern sagen können. Und so wie die Sonne entgegengesetzt vorrückt zu ihrem sinnlichen Gang, wenn Sie entgegengesetzt vom Wassermann gehen, so steht gegenüber die Jungfrau, dann geht es zur Waage. Wenn wir die Initiation aber nehmen, so müssen wir einen entgegengesetzten Gang auf der anderen Seite nehmen: von dem Wassermann zu den Fischen. So konnte Johannes sagen: Es wird etwas kommen, das nicht mehr so wird wirken müssen, wie es entspricht dem Wirken der Sonne aus dem Wassermann heraus, sondern wie es entspricht dem Wirken der Sonne aus den Fischen heraus. Es wird einer kommen, der wird eine höhere Taufe bringen. Wenn die geistige Sonne höhersteigt, so wird aus der Wassermann-Taufe die Taufe aus dem geistigen Wasser heraus. Die Sonne steigt vom Wassermann im Geistigen zu den Fischen herauf. Daher das bekannte Fischzeichen für den Träger des Christus, das ein altes Symbolum ist. Denn ebenso wie in Johannes durch ganz besondere geistige Einflüsse eine Wassermann-Initiation war, so war die Initiation, von der ich Ihnen da und dort schon gesprochen habe, die auf geheimnisvolle Weise durch alle Mysterien zustande kam, die sich um den Jesus abgespielt haben, eine FischInitiation. Ein Vorrücken der Sonne um ein Sternbild - das war das, was den Jesus von Nazareth hineinstellt in seine Zeit: daß er einer Fisch-Initiation zunächst unterworfen war.
Und im Evangelium des Markus wird uns das ja, man möchte sagen, genügend angedeutet; nur können solche Dinge nur bildhaft angedeutet werden. Der Christus Jesus zieht alle diejenigen an, die nach dem Fisch suchen. Daher sind seine ersten Apostel alle Fischer. Und wir können das, was ich gesagt habe, das Vorrücken zu den Fischen, handgreiflich finden, wenn uns gesagt wird: Ich habe euch mit Wasser getauft, Er wird euch mit Heiligem Geiste taufen.
Und da er am galiläischen See hinzog — das heißt, da die Sonne so weit gekommen war, daß man ihr Gegenbild hat kommen sehen von den Fischen herauf -, da finden sich inspiriert diejenigen, die genannt werden Simon und Simons Bruder, Jakobus und Jakobus’ Bruder Fischer, sie finden sich in der entsprechenden Weise inspiriert. Und wie können wir das alles verstehen? Wir können das nicht verstehen, wenn wir nicht noch ein wenig genauer auf die Ausdrucksweise der damaligen Zeit eingehen.
Philiströs ist unsere heutige Ausdrucksweise. Wenn ein Mensch vor uns steht, so sagen wir, das ist ein Mensch. Wenn ein zweiter vor uns steht, so sagen wir wieder, das ist ein Mensch. Ein dritter — wieder einer, und so weiter. Aber wir haben da bloß die Maya vor uns. Wenn ein Wesen zwei Beine und ein menschliches Antlitz hat, so haben wir in unserer philiströsen Ausdrucksweise nur das eine Wort: Das ist ein Mensch. Aber was ist für den Okkultismus ein Mensch? Nichts als Maya, nichts zunächst, wie er da vor uns steht, ist der Mensch, wirklich nichts. Er ist ungefähr ebensoviel wie der Regenbogen, der am Himmel steht. Wie lange ist der Regenbogen etwas? Nur so lange, als die betreffenden Bedingungen zwischen Regen und Sonnenschein gegeben sind. Wenn die Sonne und der Regen ihr Verhältnis ändern, so ist er weg. Genauso ist es mit dem Menschen. Der ist nur ein Zusammenströmen von Kräften des Makrokosmos. Kräfte müssen wir suchen am Himmel, da oder dort im Makrokosmos. Da wo man vielleicht einen Menschen vermutet irgendwo auf der Erde, da ist nichts für den Okkultisten. Aber Kräfte strömen da oben herunter und da unten hinauf, und da schneiden sie sich. Und wie die eigentümliche Konstellation bei Regen und Sonnenschein den Regenbogen ergibt, so geben Kräfte, die von oben und unten aus dem Makrokosmos zusammenströmen, eine Erscheinung, und die sieht so aus wie der Mensch - das ist der Mensch. Nichts ist der Mensch so, wie er vor uns dasteht. In Wahrheit ist er ein Schemen, eine Maya, ein Scheinbild. Denn wirklich sind die kosmischen Kräfte, die sich da schneiden, wo unser Auge einen Menschen zu sehen glaubt. Versuchen Sie ernst zu nehmen den Ausdruck: Der Mensch ist nichts, so wie er vor uns steht. Er ist Schatten von vielen Kräften. Die Wesenheit aber, die sich offenbart im Menschen, die kann ganz woanders sein als an dem Punkt, wo gerade der Mensch mit seinen zwei Beinen herumgeht. Da sind drei Menschen: Der eine ist ein urpersischer Arbeiter, der mit dem Pflug in der altpersischen Landwirtschaft wirkt. Er sieht aus wie ein Mensch. In Wahrheit ist er eine der Seelen, die gespeist werden in ihren Kräften aus dieser oder jener Welt von unten oder oben. Der zweite ist vielleicht ein urpersischer Beamter. Er wird von einer anderen Welt aus durch Kräfte gebildet, die sich in ihm schneiden. Wollen wir ihn kennen, so müssen wir zu diesen Kräften aufsteigen. Sie alle, wie Sie hier sitzen, sind in Ihrer Wirklichkeit ganz woanders. Hier herein strahlen nur die Kräfte von Ihrer eigentlichen Wesenheit. Dann stand ein dritter Perser da, von dem mußte man sagen: Der ist erst recht ein rechtes Trugbild, der ist erst recht ein Schemen, das dasteht. Was war das in Wahrheit? Da muß man bis auf die Sonne hinauf gehen; da sind die Kräfte, die dieses Schemen speisten. Da oben findet man unter den Sonnen-Geheimnissen dasjenige, was man nennen kann Goldstern, Zarathustra. Das sendet die Strahlen herunter, und hier unten steht ein Schemen, das man Zarathustra nennt. In Wahrheit ist sein Wesen gar nicht da. Das ist der dritte.
Nun ist das Wichtige, daß man in alten Zeiten sich bewußt war, was mit solchen Bezeichnungen gemeint ist; daß man nicht Namen gab wie heute, sondern daß man die Menschen benannte nach dem, was in ihnen lebte, nicht nach ihrem äußeren Scheinbilde. Darüber müssen wir uns schon ganz klar sein. So daß man hätte sagen können: Es hätte ein alter Mensch zur Zeit Christi es sehr wohl verstanden, wenn man hingewiesen hätte auf Johannes den Täufer und gesagt hätte: hier ist der Angelos des Gottes. Man hätte nur Rücksicht genommen auf das, was da Platz genommen hatte; man sprach von der Hauptsache, nicht von der Nebensache. Und nehmen wir nun einmal an, dieselbe Ausdrucksweise wurde angewendet auf Christus Jesus selber. Wie mußte man da, als man solche Sachen verstand, von dem Christus Jesus sprechen? Ja, was da auf der Erde wandelte, diesen Leib im Fleische den Christus Jesus zu nennen, das wäre einem Menschen der damaligen Zeit nicht im Traume eingefallen; sondern das war das Zeichen, daß dasjenige, was aus der Sonne geistig herunterströmte, in diesem Punkte in ganz besonderer Weise aufgefangen wurde. Ging dieser Leib, der der Leib des Jesus war, von einem Ort zum anderen, so war das die Sichtbarmachung der Sonnenkraft, die von einem Ort zum anderen ging. Diese Sonnenkraft konnte auch allein gehen. Zuweilen wurde der Ausdruck so gebraucht, daß der Christus Jesus «im Heim», im Fleisch war, aber was in ihm war, bewegte sich auch ohne seinen Leib weiter. Namentlich im JohannesEvangelium ist der Ausdruck so gebraucht, daß unter Umständen, wenn dieselbe Wesenheit sich rein geistig bewegt, der Evangelienschreiber ganz genau so spricht, wie wenn diese Sonnenkraft im fleischlichen Leibe wohnt.
Daher ist es so wichtig, daß die Taten des Christus Jesus immer in Beziehung gebracht werden zur physischen Sonne, die der äußere Ausdruck ist für die geistige Welt, die aufgefangen wird an dem Punkte, wo der fleischliche Leib herumwandelt. Wenn also der Christus Jesus zum Beispiel heilt, dann ist es die Sonnenkraft, die da heilt. Die muß aber an dem richtigen Orte des Himmels stehen: «Da es aber Abend geworden war, als die Sonne unterging, brachten sie zu ihm alle, die ein Leid hatten», Krankheiten und so weiter. — Es ist wichtig, daß man andeutet, daß diese Heilkraft herunterfließen kann, wenn die äußere Sonne untergegangen ist, wenn die Sonne nur noch geistig wirkt. Und als er wieder eine bestimmte Kraft braucht, um zu wirken, da mußte er diese auch noch aus der geistigen Sonne nehmen, nicht aus der physischen sichtbaren Sonne. «Und früh morgens, noch im Dunkeln stand er auf und ging hinaus.» — Der Weg der Sonne und der Sonnenkraft wird uns ausdrücklich angedeutet: daß diese Sonnenkraft wirkt, und daß im Grunde genommen der Jesus nur das äußere Zeichen ist, daß dieser Weg der Sonnenkraft auch dem bloßen äußeren Auge sichtbar werden konnte. Und überall, wo wir im MarkusEvangelium die Rede haben von dem Christus, ist gemeint die Sonnenkraft, die für jene Epoche unserer Erdenentwickelung ganz besonders wirksam geworden ist auf diesem Fleck der Erde, der da Palästina heißt. Und man konnte die Sonnenkraft sehen: In der oder jener Zeit ging der Christus von dem Ort zu dem Ort. Man könnte ebensogut sagen: In dieser Zeit bewegte sich die geistige Kraft der Sonne, wie in einem Brennpunkte gesammelt, von dem Ort zu jenem Ort. Und der Leib des Jesus war das äußere Zeichen, das den Augen sichtbar machte, wie sich die Sonnenkraft bewegte. Die Wege des Jesus in Palästina waren die Wege der auf die Erde herabgekommenen Sonnenkraft. Und zeichnen Sie die Schritte des Jesus als eine besondere Landkarte auf, dann haben Sie ein kosmisches Ereignis: das Hereinwirken der Sonnenkraft aus dem Makrokosmos in das Land Palästina. Und auf diese makrokosmische Sache kommt es an. Darauf deutet insbesondere der Schreiber des Markus-Evangeliums hin, der das wohl kannte, daß ein Leib, der der Träger eines solchen Prinzipes war, wie es das Christus-Prinzip ist, in einer ganz besonderen Weise von seinem Prinzip mußte überwunden werden. Es war also das Hinausweisen gerade in jene Welt, die Zarathustra so großartig hinter der sinnlichen Welt angekündigt hat, das Hinausweisen auf diese Welt, wie sie wieder hereinwirkt auf die Menschenwelt. So war jetzt durch Christus Jesus angedeutet, wie die Kräfte wieder hereinwirken auf die Erde. Daher mußte in dem Leib, der ja, wie wir gesehen haben, in einer gewissen Weise -— wenn er auch jetzt schon der Leib des nathanischen Jesus war - doch beeinflußt war von der Zarathustra-Individualität, auch eine Art Wiederholung der Zarathustra-Vorgänge vor sich gehen.
Nun hören wir die große schöne Legende von Zarathustra. Als ihn seine Mutter geboren hatte, da zeigte Zarathustra als erstes Wunder das berühmte Zarathustra-Lächeln. Das zweite der Wunder war das, daß der damalige König jenes Distriktes, wo Zarathustra geboren worden war, Duransarun, den Beschluß faßte, zu ermorden den Zarathustra, von dem ihm die rückschrittlichen Magier besondere Dinge gesagt hatten, daß aber dem König, als er erschien, das Kind zu erdolchen, der Arm gelähmt wurde. Das war das zweite der Wunder nach der Geburt des Zarathustra. Und da ließ dieser König, der seinen Dolch nicht gebrauchen konnte gegenüber Zarathustra, das Kind hinausführen zu den wilden Tieren der Wüste. Das ist der Ausdruck dafür, daß jetzt schon in frühester Kindheit Zarathustra sehen mußte dasjenige, was der Mensch sehen muß, wenn er unrein hinaussieht. Er sieht statt der edlen Gruppenseele und der edlen, höheren geistigen Wesenheiten den Ausfluß seiner wilden Phantasie. Das ist das Hinausführen in die Wüste zu den wilden Tieren, von denen Zarathustra unversehrt bleibt. Das ist das dritte der Wunder. Das vierte war wieder ein Wunder bei den wilden Tieren und so weiter. Immer waren es die guten Geister des Ahura Mazdao, die dem Zarathustra dienten.
Jene Wunder finden wir im Markus-Evangelium wiederholt: «Und alsbald treibt ihn der Geist in die Wüste» — eigentlich heißt es Einsamkeit — «vierzig Tage lang, und wurde versucht vom Satan, und war bei den wilden Tieren, und die Engel dienten ihm.» Da wird uns gezeigt, daß der Leib vorbereitet wurde, sozusagen wie in einem Brennpunkte dasjenige aufzunehmen, was im Makrokosmos vorging. Es mußte das wieder geschehen, was bei Zarathustra geschehen war: das Hinausführen zu den wilden Tieren. Der Leib nahm auf, was aus dem Makrokosmos hereinkam.
Das Markus-Evangelium stellt uns schon in den allerersten Zeilen in die größten Zusammenhänge hinein. Und ich wollte Ihnen zeigen, wie im Grunde genommen dieses Markus-Evangelium, wenn man nur erst die Worte im rechten Sinne versteht — nicht wie in dem der heutigen philiströsen Sprache, sondern in dem der alten Sprachen, wo jedes Wort hinter sich lebendige Welten hat -, wenn man es im Sinne dieser alten Sprachen versteht, dann bekommt das Markus-Evangelium neues Leben, neue Kraft. Aber man muß sagen: Unsere heutige Sprache kann erst mit vielen Umschreibungen das wiederum herausfinden, was für die alten Sprachen schon in den Worten gelegen hat. Das, was wir sprechen, wenn wir sagen: Der Mensch lebt auf der Erde und bildet sein Ich aus; der Mensch lebte früher auf dem Monde, da waren es die Engel, die ihre Menschheitsstufe durchmachten -, das liegt alles zugrunde, wenn es heißt: «Siehe, ich sende meinen Engel vor den Menschen her.» Diese Worte sind nicht zu verstehen ohne die Voraussetzung dessen, was in der Geisteswissenschaft geboten wird. Und die Leute in der Gegenwart sollten ehrlich sein und sollten sagen bei den Worten am Beginne des Markus-Evangeliums: Das ist unverständlich. — Statt dessen stehen sie im billigen Hochmut da und erklären, die Geisteswissenschaft sei eine Phantasterei, die allerlei hineinlegt in das, was sie in einfacher Weise wissen. Sie wissen es eben gar nicht, die Menschen der Gegenwart. Und man hat heute nicht mehr das Prinzip, das man zum Beispiel im alten Persien hatte, wo von Epoche zu Epoche die alte heilige Urkunde umgeschrieben wurde, um für jede Epoche neu eingekleidet zu werden. So wurde das göttlich-geistige Wort als Zend Avesta umgestaltet und wieder umgestaltet. Und was heute da ist, ist die letzte Gestalt. Siebenmal wurde die persische Bibel neu geschrieben. Und die Anthroposophie soll den Menschen lehren, wie notwendig es ist, daß die Bücher, in denen die heiligen Geheimnisse geschrieben werden, von Epoche zu Epoche umgeschrieben werden müssen. Denn gerade wenn man den großen alten Stil bewahren will, dann darf man nicht versuchen, sozusagen soviel als möglich bei den alten Worten zu verbleiben. Das kann man nicht, die versteht man nicht mehr, sondern man muß versuchen, in unmittelbares Verständnis der Gegenwart die alten Worte umzusetzen. Wir haben das versucht in bezug auf die Genesis im Sommer. Da haben Sie gesehen, wie manche der Worte umgesetzt werden müssen. Sie haben vielleicht heute einen kleinen Begriff davon bekommen, wie auch im Markus-Evangelium die Worte umgesetzt werden müssen.
Eleventh Lecture
Over the years, in various branches and in various courses, and certainly also before a large number of the anthroposophical friends sitting here, reflections have been made on the Gospel of John, the Gospel of Luke, and the Gospel of Matthew, and in these reflections on the three Gospels we have tried to let the great event in Palestine, the mystery of Golgotha, appear before our spiritual eye from three different sides, in three different ways, as it were, the great event in Palestine, the mystery of Golgotha. And these reflections may well have been suitable for establishing an ever-increasing appreciation of these unique events in our souls. We have already pointed out that the reason why we have four Gospels is essentially to be found in the fact that the Gospel writers, as inspired occultists, wanted to depict the great event, each from one side, so to speak, as one depicts or photographs something external from a certain point of view. And when one takes pictures of something from different sides, one can, by combining what the pictures reveal, bring what is actually real, reality, before the soul, as it were, by looking at them together. Each of the evangelists actually gives us occasion to view the great event in Palestine from a very special side.
From one side, which we can also call the opening of the highest human, occult, and other goals, and besides this highest human aspect also taking into account the highest world principle, from this side the Gospel of John gives us an insight into the great events of Palestine.
The Gospel of Luke opens up a view of the mysteries surrounding the personality of Jesus of Nazareth, the Solomonic and Nathanic Jesus, up to the moment when the great inspiration of Jesus of Nazareth entered through the Christ.
For those who have either heard the cycle as it was presented or who will read it later, the Gospel of Matthew shows how, as it were, out of the folklore of the ancient Hebrews, out of the folk secrets of the Hebrew people, the physical body principle was prepared, so to speak, in which the Christ principle was to be incarnated for three years.
In a certain sense, it is actually the Gospel of Mark that can lead us to the highest heights of spiritual scientific Christian contemplation, and through the Gospel of Mark we are given the opportunity to look into many things that are to be communicated to us through the Gospels, but which are not brought home to us in the same way through the other Gospels as they are through the Gospel of Mark. And I have set myself the task for this evening of saying a few words, since the opportunity is still there, in connection with the Gospel of Mark.
Now, however, when we speak about this, we must realize how necessary it is to look into many things that the superficial world of the present has no real inclination to look into. If one is to understand the Gospel of Mark and all its depths, one must familiarize oneself with the very different way of expressing oneself that people had at the time when Christ Jesus still walked on earth. Do not take it amiss if I try to tell you what I actually want to say with this by means of a clear shading, a clear chiaroscuro.
We express what we want to say through language, and the words of language are supposed to illustrate in a certain way what lives in our souls. The way in which we express what lives in our souls through language differs greatly between the different epochs of human development. And if we were to go back to the epoch of ancient Hebrew development, to that wonderful mode of expression that was still possible in the ancient Hebrew temple language, we would find a completely different way of clothing the secrets of our soul in words than people today can even imagine. When a word was spoken in the ancient Hebrew language—only the consonants were written, the vowels were added later—it sounded not only like what it sounds like today, a rather abstract concept, but like a whole world. And that is precisely why the vowels were not actually written out, because the person speaking revealed his innermost feelings in the way he vocalized, while the consonants were more a description, a depiction of what was outside. One could say that when an ancient Hebrew wrote a B – which corresponds to our B today – he always felt something like a depiction of external circumstances, of something that forms a warm, hut-like enclosure. The letter B always evoked the image of something that can enclose a being like a house. You couldn't pronounce the letter B without it living in your soul. And when you vocalized an A, you couldn't do so without something living in the A, something strong, powerful, even radiant. In this way, the soul lived on; the content of the soul floated out with the words and continued to float in space and float toward other souls. So language was a much more living thing. It went much more into the mysteries of existence than our language does.
That is the light I would like to paint for you. And I would like to contrast that with the shadow: that in our time we have become highly philistine in this respect. Our language now expresses only abstractions, generalities. People don't feel that anymore. Basically, it only expresses philistinism. How could it be otherwise in a time when people are beginning to use language even in writing long before they have any intellectual content; in a time when so much goes into print and reaches the masses, when everyone thinks they have to write something, when everything becomes the subject of writing. When our society was founded, I experienced writers coming together out of curiosity, with the intention of perhaps being able to get a novel out of it. Why shouldn't there be characters that can be used in public writing? So we must be clear that, in contrast to the way language was once thought of as something sacred, something for which we are responsible because God speaks through it, we now have a language that has become abstract, empty, philistine. That is why it is so infinitely difficult to squeeze those great, powerful facts that are communicated to us and resonate, for example, in the Gospels, into today's words. Why shouldn't people today believe that everything can be expressed in our language? They cannot understand that our language says anything that is empty compared to what even the Greek language meant with a single word. And when we read the Bible today, we read something that has been sifted once, twice, three times in relation to its original content, but sifted in such a way that it is not the best that remains, but always the worst. Therefore, it is of course easy to refer to the words of the Bible as they are today. But we are at our worst when we refer to the Gospel of Mark as it is available to us today. We must not do that under any circumstances.
Now you know that the Gospel of Mark begins with words that are based on what is considered to be Weizsäcker's excellent translation, but which — as one might expect, since it is regarded as so excellent today — is not so excellent after all: “As it is written in the prophet Isaiah: Behold, I send my messenger before you, who will prepare your way. Hear, how it cries in the desert: prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.”
Honest people would basically have to say to themselves, if the Gospel of Mark begins in this Weizsäcker translation: I don't understand a word of this, because anyone who wants to understand it must be deceiving themselves. Anyone who approaches this honestly cannot understand anything when it says: “Behold, I send my messenger before you, who shall prepare your way. Hear what is spoken in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.” For either a triviality is being said, or something is being said that cannot be understood. Now, of course, one must first gather together the concepts that make it possible to understand a statement such as Isaiah's here. For Isaiah was pointing to the great and mighty event that was to be the most significant event in the development of humanity. What was he actually pointing to? Well, from what we have already described, we can very well point to what Isaiah foretold; we can point to it by saying:
In ancient times, human beings had a kind of clairvoyance. They had the ability to grow into the spiritual-divine world with their soul forces. What actually happened to human beings when they grew into the divine-spiritual world? When they grew into the divine-spiritual world, they ceased to use their “I” to the extent that it had already developed at that time; they used their astral body, and in this were the powers that were seer's powers, powers of vision, while all the powers that reside in the I were gradually awakened to the perception of the physical world. It is the I that makes use of the sensory instruments. But when the old human being wanted to gain knowledge about the world, he used his astral body. So the old human being saw and perceived in the astral body. And therein lies the further development, that you find the transition from the astral body to the use of the I. And in relation to this I, the Christ impulse should be the most intense impulse. If Christ is to be taken into the I in such a way that Paul's words are true: Not I, but Christ in me — then the I has the power to grow into the spiritual world through itself. Formerly, only the astral body could do this.
Thus we have before us an evolution of humanity such that we can say: Human beings used their astral body as an organ of knowledge, and more and more they lost the ability to develop any organ of knowledge in the astral body. The closer one came to the Christ event, the more one reached a stage of development where one had to say: My astral body has less and less ability to see into the spiritual world. Nothing remained of his connection with the spiritual world, and the I was not yet powerful enough to obtain any enlightenment from the world. That was the age when Christ was approaching, so to speak.
Now, in the actual development of humanity, certain great advances are gradually prepared and then actually occur. This was also the case with the Christ impulse. But there had to be a transition. It could not be that human beings saw their astral body gradually becoming dull to the spiritual world, so that they felt complete desolation and emptiness within themselves until the I was ignited by the Christ impulse. That could not be allowed to happen. Instead, some people, through a special influence from the spiritual world, saw something in their astral body that was similar to what they would later recognize and see through the I. The I-ness was prepared in the astral body, so to speak. This was a preliminary assumption of the I-ness in the astral body. After all, human beings had only become earthly human beings through the I and through their development. The astral body actually belonged to the old moon. At that time, Angelos, the angelic human being, was on the human stage. The angel was human on the old moon; on Earth, the human being is human. We know that. It was appropriate for human beings to use their astral bodies on the moon. Everything else was merely preparation for the development of the I. The beginning of our earthly development was a repetition of the lunar development. For in the astral body, human beings could never become completely human; only the angel could become human in the astral body on the moon. Just as in earthly human beings, in order to inspire the I that was Christ, there had to be the possibility, in preparation for this I-ness, that the angels of the moon, the moon people, the Angeloi, prophets, were present to inspire the astral body of human beings so that the I-ness could already be prepared. What a prophet might have characterized as follows had to happen: There will come a time in human evolution when humanity will be ready for ego development. In the astral body, only the Angeloi of the moon have risen to the highest level. But in order for human beings to be prepared for this ego, certain people who experience this through grace in exceptional circumstances must be inspired on earth in such a way that they act like angels, even though they are human beings, that they are angels in human form.
This brings us to an important occult concept without which you cannot understand the development of humanity in the occult sense at all. Outwardly speaking, it is of course easy to simply say that everything is Maya. But that is an abstraction. You have to take it really seriously. Therefore, you have to be able to say: Well, there is a human being standing in front of me, but he is Maya — who knows if he is even a human being? Perhaps being human is only the outer shell, and a completely different being than the human being uses this outer shell to bring about something that cannot yet be brought about by the human being. I hinted at this in my book The Gate of Initiation.
In ancient times, such an event became relevant for humanity when the individuality that had lived in the old Elijah was reborn in John the Baptist, and when an angel entered the soul of John the Baptist for his incarnation at that time and used the physicality and also the soul nature of John the Baptist to bring about what no human being could have brought about. In John lives an Angelos who has to go before and proclaim what was to live as true selfhood in the most comprehensive sense in Jesus of Nazareth. It is extremely important to know that John the Baptist is a Maya and that an Angelos, a messenger, lives in him. In Greek it also says: Behold, I send my messenger, Angelos, angel. Only Germans no longer think of the fact that in Greek the word Angelos is used here: Behold, I send my angel before him. This therefore points to a profound world mystery that preceded the Baptist, which Isaiah predicted. It characterizes John the Baptist as a Maya, as an illusion, he who in truth encloses the angel, the Angelos, who as an angel has to proclaim what man is actually to become through the reception of the Christ impulse, because angels must first proclaim what man is to become later. So at this point it would be appropriate to say: Behold, that which gives the world its individuality sends the Angelos before you, to whom individuality is to be given.
Now let us turn to the third sentence. What does it mean? Here we must first consider the entire situation of world history. What had happened in the human breast when the astral body gradually lost its ability to extend its forces like tentacles and look clearly into the divine-spiritual world? In the past, when the astral body was activated, it could look into the divine-spiritual world. Now this possibility gradually disappeared more and more, and darkness fell within human beings. In earlier times, human beings could spread their astral body over all the beings of the divine-spiritual world. Now they were lonely within themselves — lonely is the same as &onuog. What was the human soul now lived in loneliness. This is also stated in the Greek text: Behold how it appears, how it speaks there in the loneliness of the soul — for my sake, say in the desolation of the soul — when the astral body could no longer spread out into the divine-spiritual world. Listen to how it calls in the desert of your soul, in the loneliness of your soul.
But what is being proclaimed in advance? We must now clarify what a very specific word meant when it was used in reference to soul phenomena, to spiritual phenomena in general, especially in Hebrew, but also in Greek: the word Kyrios. If one translates this as “the Lord,” as is usually done, one is translating utter nonsense. What is meant by it? Everyone in ancient times who uttered such a statement knew that it meant something connected with the spiritual progress of the human race. Therefore, they knew that the word Kyrios also referred to the secrets of the soul. When we look at the astral body, we have various forces in the soul. We usually call them thinking, feeling, and willing. The soul thinks, feels, and wills. These are the three forces that work in the soul. But they are the soul's serving forces. As human beings progressed in their development, these forces, which were formerly the masters to whom human beings were devoted—for human beings had to wait to see whether their thinking, feeling, and willing were called upon—these individual soul forces were subordinated to Kyrios, the Lord of the soul forces, the I. And nothing else was understood by the word when it referred to the soul than the I, which no longer held fast in the old sense: the divine-spiritual thinks, feels, and wills in me, but rather: I think, I feel, I will—the Lord asserts Himself in the soul forces. Prepare yourselves, human souls, to walk such soul paths that you awaken in your soul the strong I, Kyrios, the Lord in your soul. Hear how it calls in the loneliness of the soul. Prepare the power or the direction of the soul's Lord, the I. Open up his powers! - This is how one must translate it approximately: open up so that it can come in, so that it is not the slave of thinking, feeling, and willing; open up his powers! And if you translate these words: Behold, that which is the I-ness sends forth before you its angel, who shall give you the opportunity to understand how it calls in the loneliness of the astral soul; prepare the directions of the I, open up for it, for the I, the powers! — then you will have a meaning in these significant words of the prophet Isaiah; then you will have the reference to the greatest event in human development; then you will understand how Isaiah speaks of John the Baptist, how he points out that the loneliness of the human soul longs for the coming of the Lord in the soul, the I. And now the words become flesh and blood, and that is how we must understand such words.
And why was John the Baptist able to be the bearer of the Angelos? He was able to be so because he had undergone a very specific initiation. Initiations are specialized. They are not something general, they are specialized. For those individuals who have a very special task, an initiation must take place in a very specific way. Now, everything that happens in the spiritual world is provided for, so that what are actually spiritual facts are truly revealed in the heavens in the script of the stars. One can receive the solar initiation, that is, enter into the mysteries of the spiritual world, which is the world of Ahura Mazdao, of which the sun is the outer expression. But one can be initiated into the solar mysteries in twelve different ways, and each initiation is in a certain sense a solar initiation, but it is nevertheless different from the other eleven. Depending on whether a person has this or that task for the whole of humanity, he receives an initiation of which one can say: This is a solar initiation, but one that must be expressed by saying that the forces flow in as if the sun were in the sign of Cancer. This is different from receiving a solar initiation that must be expressed by saying: The forces flow in as if the sun were in the sign of Libra. These are expressions for different specialized initiations. And those individuals who have such a high task, such a high mission as that characterized here for John the Baptist, must be initiated in a very special way into a special initiation, because only from this can they have the strong power to carry out this mission in the world, even under very one-sided circumstances. And so, in order to become the bearer of the Angelos, John the Baptist underwent the solar initiation that can be called the initiation from the sign of Aquarius. Just as the sun stands in the sign of Aquarius, so this is a symbol of the kind of initiation that John the Baptist received in order to become the bearer of the angel, by taking in the power of the sun as it flows when it stands in relation to the other stars in such a way that it is described with the expression: it stands in the sign of Aquarius. That was the symbol. John had the Aquarius initiation. The sign was even given the name Aquarius because those who had undergone the Aquarian initiation had, as a spiritual initiation, the special ability to do with human beings what John did as the “Aquarius,” as the baptizer: namely, to truly enable people, through immersion in water, to free their etheric body to such an extent that they attained a self-knowledge that made it possible to understand what was most important at that time. People were immersed, and for a moment their etheric bodies were freed. Through baptism in the Jordan, people could feel the very special importance of this epoch in world history. That is why John was initiated into the baptismal initiation. And because this had to be expressed symbolically with the sun's rays flowing from the sign in which the sun stands, this sign was also called Aquarius. Thus, the name was transferred from the human ability. Today, a whole number of learned ignoramuses attempt to interpret spiritual events, so to speak, by bringing heaven down to earth. They say: Well, that means the advance of the sun. — All learned gentlemen who, in essence, know nothing, interpret human events from the sky. It was the other way around: what lives spiritually in human beings was transferred to the sky by using the sky as a means of expression. So that John the Baptist could say: I am the one who baptizes you with water. And that was the same as if he had said: I baptize you with water, I am endowed with the initiation of Aquarius. That would have been the words John the Baptist could have said to his intimate disciples. And just as the sun advances in the opposite direction to its sensual course when it moves opposite Aquarius, so the Virgin stands opposite, and then it moves to Libra. But if we take the initiation, we must take an opposite course on the other side: from Aquarius to Pisces. So John could say: Something will come that will no longer have to work as it corresponds to the working of the sun out of Aquarius, but as it corresponds to the working of the sun out of Pisces. One will come who will bring a higher baptism. When the spiritual sun rises higher, the baptism of Aquarius becomes the baptism out of spiritual water. The sun rises from Aquarius in the spiritual realm to Pisces. Hence the well-known sign of the fish for the bearer of Christ, which is an ancient symbol. For just as in John there was an Aquarian initiation through very special spiritual influences, so the initiation of which I have spoken to you here and there, which came about in a mysterious way through all the mysteries that took place around Jesus, was a Pisces initiation. An advance of the sun by one constellation—that was what placed Jesus of Nazareth in his time: that he was first subjected to a Pisces initiation.
And in the Gospel of Mark, this is, one might say, sufficiently hinted at; but such things can only be hinted at figuratively. Christ Jesus attracts all those who seek the fish. That is why his first apostles were all fishermen. And we can find what I have said, the advance toward the fish, tangible when we are told: I have baptized you with water, He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.
And when he came to the Sea of Galilee—that is, when the sun had come so far that its reflection could be seen rising from the fish—those who were called Simon and Simon's brother, James and James's brother, the fishermen, found themselves inspired in the appropriate way. And how can we understand all this? We cannot understand this unless we examine the language of that time a little more closely.
Our language today is philistine. When a person stands before us, we say, that is a person. When a second person stands before us, we say again, that is a person. A third — again one, and so on. But we have only the Maya before us. If a being has two legs and a human face, we have only one word in our philistine language: that is a human being. But what is a human being in occultism? Nothing but Maya, nothing at first, as it stands there before us, is the human being, really nothing. It is about as much as the rainbow that stands in the sky. How long is the rainbow something? Only as long as the conditions between rain and sunshine are present. When the sun and rain change their relationship, it is gone. It is the same with human beings. They are only a confluence of forces from the macrocosm. We must seek forces in the sky, here or there in the macrocosm. Where one might suspect a human being to be somewhere on Earth, there is nothing for the occultist. But forces flow down from above and up from below, and there they intersect. And just as the peculiar constellation of rain and sunshine produces the rainbow, so forces flowing together from above and below from the macrocosm produce a phenomenon that looks like a human being—that is the human being. Nothing is the human being as he stands before us. In truth, he is a shadow, a maya, an illusion. For what is real are the cosmic forces that intersect where our eye believes it sees a human being. Try to take seriously the expression: Man is nothing as he stands before us. He is the shadow of many forces. But the essence that reveals itself in man can be somewhere completely different from the point where man is walking around on his two legs. There are three people: one is a primitive Persian worker who works with a plow in ancient Persian agriculture. He looks like a human being. In reality, he is one of the souls that are fed in their powers from this or that world below or above. The second is perhaps a primitive Persian official. He is formed from another world by forces that intersect within him. If we want to know him, we must ascend to these forces. All of you sitting here are, in reality, somewhere else entirely. Only the forces of your actual being shine here. Then there stood a third Persian, of whom one had to say: He is truly a mere illusion, he is truly a shadow standing there. What was that in reality? One must go up to the sun; there are the forces that fed this shadow. Up there, among the secrets of the sun, one finds what can be called the golden star, Zarathustra. It sends down its rays, and down here stands a shadow called Zarathustra. In reality, his essence is not there at all. That is the third one.
Now, the important thing is that in ancient times people were aware of what such designations meant; that they did not give names as they do today, but named people after what lived within them, not after their outward appearance. We must be very clear about this. So that one could have said: An old man at the time of Christ would have understood very well if one had pointed to John the Baptist and said: Here is the Angelos of God. One would have taken into account only what had taken place; one spoke of the main thing, not of the secondary thing. And let us now suppose that the same expression was used of Christ Jesus himself. How would one have had to speak of Christ Jesus when one understood such things? Yes, to call this body in the flesh that walked on earth Christ Jesus would not have occurred to a person of that time in a dream; rather, it was the sign that what streamed down spiritually from the sun was caught in a very special way at this point. When this body, which was the body of Jesus, went from one place to another, it was the manifestation of the sun's power moving from one place to another. This sun's power could also go alone. At times the expression was used to mean that Christ Jesus was “at home” in the flesh, but what was in him continued to move even without his body. In the Gospel of John in particular, the expression is used in such a way that, under certain circumstances, when the same entity moves purely spiritually, the Gospel writer speaks exactly as if this solar power were dwelling in the physical body.
That is why it is so important that the deeds of Christ Jesus are always related to the physical sun, which is the outer expression of the spiritual world that is caught up at the point where the physical body wanders around. So when Christ Jesus heals, for example, it is the sun's power that heals. But it must be in the right place in the heavens: “When evening came, when the sun was setting, they brought to him all who were sick,” with illnesses and so on. It is important to indicate that this healing power can flow down when the outer sun has set, when the sun is only working spiritually. And when he needed a certain power again to work, he had to take it from the spiritual sun, not from the physical, visible sun. “And early in the morning, while it was still dark, he got up and went out.” — The path of the sun and the power of the sun is expressly indicated to us: that this power of the sun is at work, and that, basically, Jesus is only the outward sign that this path of the sun's power could also become visible to the mere outward eye. And wherever we read about Christ in the Gospel of Mark, we are referring to the sun's power, which became particularly effective during that epoch of our earth's development in that part of the world called Palestine. And one could see the sun's power: at this or that time, Christ went from place to place. One could just as well say: at that time, the spiritual power of the sun moved, as if gathered in a focal point, from one place to another. And the body of Jesus was the outward sign that made visible to the eyes how the sun's power moved. The paths of Jesus in Palestine were the paths of the sun's power that had descended to earth. And if you draw the steps of Jesus as a special map, you have a cosmic event: the working of the sun's power from the macrocosm into the land of Palestine. And this macrocosmic event is what matters. This is pointed out in particular by the writer of the Gospel of Mark, who was well aware that a body that was the carrier of such a principle as the Christ principle had to be overcome in a very special way by its principle. It was therefore the pointing out of precisely that world which Zarathustra so magnificently announced behind the sensory world, the pointing out of this world as it again influences the human world. Thus, through Christ Jesus, it was now indicated how the forces again influence the earth. Therefore, in the body, which, as we have seen, was in a certain way — even though it was already the body of the Nathanic Jesus — influenced by the Zarathustra individuality, a kind of repetition of the Zarathustra events had to take place.
Now we hear the great and beautiful legend of Zarathustra. When his mother gave birth to him, Zarathustra showed his first miracle, the famous Zarathustra smile. The second miracle was that the king of the district where Zarathustra was born, Duransarun, decided to murder Zarathustra, about whom the backward magicians had told him special things, but when he appeared to stab the child, his arm was paralyzed. That was the second miracle after the birth of Zarathustra. And so this king, who could not use his dagger against Zarathustra, had the child taken out to the wild animals of the desert. This is an expression of the fact that even in his earliest childhood, Zarathustra had to see what man must see when he looks out with impure eyes. Instead of the noble group soul and the noble, higher spiritual beings, he sees the outpouring of his wild imagination. This is the leading out into the desert to the wild animals, from which Zarathustra remains unharmed. This is the third of the miracles. The fourth was again a miracle among the wild animals, and so on. It was always the good spirits of Ahura Mazdao who served Zarathustra.
We find these miracles repeated in the Gospel of Mark: “And immediately the Spirit drove him into the desert” — actually it says solitude — “for forty days, and he was tempted by Satan, and was with the wild animals, and the angels served him.” Here we are shown that the body was prepared, as it were, like a focal point to receive what was happening in the macrocosm. What had happened to Zarathustra had to happen again: being led out to the wild animals. The body took in what came in from the macrocosm.
The Gospel of Mark places us in the greatest context right from the very first lines. And I wanted to show you how, when you understand the words in their true sense — not in today's philistine language, but in the ancient languages, where every word has living worlds behind it — when you understand it in the sense of these ancient languages, then the Gospel of Mark takes on new life, new power. But it must be said: Our modern language can only discover what was already contained in the words of the ancient languages through many paraphrases. What we say when we say: Man lives on earth and develops his ego; man used to live on the moon, where it was the angels who went through their human stage — all of this lies at the foundation of the words: “Behold, I send my angel before you.” These words cannot be understood without the prerequisite knowledge provided by spiritual science. And people today should be honest and say, when they read the words at the beginning of the Gospel of Mark: This is incomprehensible. Instead, they stand there in cheap arrogance and declare that spiritual science is a fantasy that puts all kinds of things into what they know in a simple way. The people of today simply do not know. And today we no longer have the principle that existed, for example, in ancient Persia, where the old sacred documents were rewritten from epoch to epoch in order to be clothed anew for each epoch. Thus the divine-spiritual word was transformed and transformed again as the Zend Avesta. And what we have today is the final form. The Persian Bible was rewritten seven times. And anthroposophy is supposed to teach people how necessary it is that the books in which the sacred secrets are written must be rewritten from epoch to epoch. For if one wants to preserve the great old style, one must not try to remain as close as possible to the old words. That is impossible; they are no longer understood. Instead, one must try to translate the old words into a direct understanding of the present. We tried this with Genesis in the summer. There you saw how some of the words have to be translated. Perhaps today you have gained a little insight into how the words in the Gospel of Mark also have to be translated.