The Universal Human
GA 124
12 December 1910, Munich
3. The Lord of the Soul
Many of the lectures I have given over the years in anthroposophical groups to friends—some of whom are sitting here today—have dealt with the gospels of John, Luke, and Matthew.1See Rudolf Steiner, The Gospel of St. John, vol. 103 in the Collected Works, repr. (Hudson, NY: Anthroposophic Press, 1988), The Gospel of St. John and Its Relation to the Other Gospels, The Gospel of St. John and Its Relation to the Other Gospels, vol. 112 in the Collected Works (Spring Valley, NY: Anthroposophic Press, 1982), The Gospel of St. Luke, vol. 114 in the Collected Works, repr. (London: Rudolf Steiner Press, 1988), and The Gospel of St. Matthew, vol. 123 in the Collected Works, repr. (London: Rudolf Steiner Press, 1985). In those lectures, we have tried to recreate in our minds the great event in Palestine, the Mystery of Golgotha, from three different angles—in three different ways, so to speak. We hope these lectures could establish an ever-increasing appreciation of this unique event in our souls. I have already pointed out that we have four gospels because their authors were inspired occultists and each wanted to represent this great event from one perspective only, just as we take pictures or photograph external objects from only one point of view. When we then take the pictures from various angles and combine them, looking at all of them together, we can have the actual reality before our souls. Thus, each of the evangelists gives us the opportunity to consider the great event of Palestine from one particular standpoint.
The Gospel of Saint John gives us an insight into these events from a perspective we may call a revelation of the highest human and occult aims, as well as of the highest world principle. In Saint Luke's Gospel, on the other hand, we are given an insight into the secrets surrounding the personality of Jesus of Nazareth—the Solomon and Nathan Jesuses—up to the moment when his inspiration through the Christ took place. As you know from my lecture cycle on the Gospel of Saint Matthew—if you missed the lectures you can read them later—this gospel shows how the physical body in which Christ was to be incarnated for three years was prepared in the Hebrew people.
In a certain way, the Gospel of Saint Mark leads us to the highest summits of the spiritual-scientific, Christian world view. It gives us the opportunity to look into many things that are imparted to us through the gospels but are not touched upon in the same way by the other evangelists. Today, therefore, I have set myself the task to speak about this gospel.
We must be aware that it is necessary to consider many things that the superficial world of our time does not really want to look at. If we want to understand Saint Mark's Gospel in all its depth, we must familiarize ourselves with the different way of expressing things that prevailed at the time when Christ Jesus walked the earth. Do not take it amiss, then, if in order to convey what I have to tell you, I paint it in strong colors.
We express what we want to say in language, which is to bring out what lives in our souls. The expression of soul content in language differs from one epoch of human development to another. In the Hebraic epoch, the ancient Hebrew sacred language provided a wonderful way of expressing things. It was very different from our way of clothing the secrets of the soul into words. When a word was spoken in old Hebrew, it contained not merely an abstract idea, as it does today, but a whole world. The vowels were not written because the speaker expressed his innermost being through his way of vocalizing, whereas the consonants contained the description—the picture, so to speak—of what was outside. We can say that when the Hebrews wrote, for example, what corresponds to our B, they always felt something like a picture of outer conditions, something that formed a warm, hut-like enclosure. The letter B always evoked the image of something that can enclose a being like a house; the letter could not be pronounced without this image living in the speaker's soul. When A was vocalized, there was always something of strength and force, even of radiating power, living within it. That is how the soul lived on; the spiritual-psychological content flowed out with the words, soared into space, and touched other souls. Obviously, language was then a far more living affair and entered more fully into the secrets of existence than our contemporary language.
That is the light in the picture I mentioned. The shadows are in our having become, to a great extent, philistines. Our language expresses only abstractions and generalities, and we no longer even notice this—so our language at bottom expresses only the philistine. It could not be otherwise in an age when people begin to write literature long before they have any spiritual content to express, when an infinite amount of printed material goes to the general public, when everyone thinks he must write something, and when everything can be a subject to write about. I have even seen authors turning up at the founding of our society out of curiosity, hoping to find material for a novel in it and looking for protagonists that can be dished up in the popular style.
We must be aware, then, that our language has become abstract, empty, and philistine, in contrast to the way it was when people still thought of language as something holy, something that must be handled responsibly, and through which God would speak. That is why it is so infinitely difficult to squeeze the tremendous facts imparted to us by, and resounding in, the gospels into modern words. Why shouldn't people these days believe that everything can be expressed in contemporary language? They cannot understand that this language is empty of what even the Greeks expressed with one word. Furthermore, reading the Bible today, we find something that, compared to its original content, has been sifted once, twice, even thrice, but in such a way that not the best but only the worst remains. It is therefore rather cheap to refer to the modern wording of the Bible. We go most astray, however, when we turn to the Gospel of Mark as we have it in the Bible today.
In the translation by Weizsäcker, which is generally considered excellent—and because it is considered so excellent nowadays, we can assume that it is not all that good—the first lines of the Gospel of St. Mark are rendered as follows:
As it is 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 admit that if Weizsäcker begins the Gospel of Saint Mark like this, they do not understand a single word of it; those who claim to understand this are fooling themselves. People who work honestly will not be able to understand the lines, “Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, who shall prepare thy way; the voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.” For they express either a triviality or something that cannot be understood. The concepts that make it possible to understand what Isaiah says here must first be acquired. For Isaiah pointed to the great, tremendous event that was to be the most significant event in human evolution. What was he really referring to?
Based upon what we already know, we can say what Isaiah prophesied. We can say that in ancient times humanity had a kind of clairvoyance that allowed people to grow into the divine-spiritual world with their soul forces. But what really happened when people grew thus into the spiritual world? They ceased to make use of the I, insofar as they had developed it at that time. Instead, they used their astral body, with its forces of vision and seership—whereas the forces rooted in the I were gradually awakened in the process of perceiving the physical world. It is the I that uses the senses as instruments. When the ancients sought enlightenment about the world, they employed their astral bodies. They saw and perceived in their astral bodies. Further evolution consisted in the transition from the use of the astral body to the use of the I. In regard to the I, the Christ impulse was the most intense impulse. If Christ is taken into the I in the sense of St. Paul's words, “It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me,” then the I will have the power to grow into the spiritual world through its own efforts. Formerly, only the astral body could do this.
Thus, we can say of human evolution that human beings formerly used their astral body as an organ of perception, but gradually lost the ability to develop organs of perception in the astral body. As humanity approached the time of the Christ event, it entered an evolutionary stage in which people had to realize that their astral body was less and less able to see into the spiritual world. The astral body's connection to the spiritual world came to nothing, and the I was not yet forceful enough to get any enlightenment from the outer world. That was the time when Christ drew near.
Now in the evolution of humanity, certain great steps forward are gradually prepared before they actually take place. This was the case with the Christ impulse, but there had to be a transition. The development I just described could not have gone so far that human beings would have seen their astral body gradually becoming dulled toward the spiritual world and would have felt an utter desolation and dreariness in themselves until the I would have been kindled later through the Christ impulse. Things were not to turn out that way. Rather, a few individuals developed so far that through a particular influence from the spiritual world they saw with the astral body something similar to what people were to see and know later through the I. In other words, the I was prepared in the astral body.
Indeed, it is through the I and its development that human beings have become earthly beings. The astral body really belonged to the ancient moon when the angels, the Angeloi, were at the human stage. The angels were human on the old moon; we are human beings on the earth. On the old moon, human beings appropriately used their astral body, and everything else was just preparation for the evolution of the I. The beginning of our earth evolution was a repetition of our moon evolution on a higher level. After all, had we remained limited to the astral body, we could never have become fully human. Only angels on the moon could become human in the astral body. Therefore, just as Christ lived in earthly human beings in order to inspire the I in them, so for the preparation of the I there had to be prophets from the angels of the moon, the moon-humans, to inspire the astral body so that the I-hood of human beings could be prepared. A prophet could have characterized it in the following way. “There will come a time in human evolution when humanity will be ripe for the development of the I. Only the angels of the moon were raised to the highest in their astral bodies, but for human beings to be prepared for this I-hood, certain people on earth had to be so inspired through grace and under exceptional conditions that they could work as angels even though they were humans. They were angels in human form.”
Here we arrive at an important occult concept that is indispensable to the occult understanding of human evolution. It is naturally easy to say that all is Maya, but that is an abstraction. We must really take it seriously and be able to say, “A human being stands before me, but he or she is Maya. Who knows, he or she may not really be human. Perhaps the humanness is only an outer veil employed by quite another being, not a human one, to bring about something that cannot yet be effected by humanity.” I have indicated something of this in my The Portal of Initiation.2Rudolf Steiner, The Portal of Initiation: A Rosicrucian Mystery Drama (Blauvelt, NY: Steinerbooks, 1981).
Such an event occurred when the individuality who lived in Elijah was reborn in John the Baptist. An angel entered his soul and used his body and soul to do what would have been impossible for a human being to accomplish. An angel lived in John who had to announce the true I that was to live in Jesus of Nazareth. It is extremely important to know that John the Baptist is only Maya and that an angelic messenger lived in him. This is found also in the Greek version of the Bible: “Behold, I send my messenger [i.e., Angeloi or angel].” Thus, a profound cosmic mystery connected with John the Baptist was prophesied by Isaiah. As we have seen, Isaiah characterized John as Maya or illusion, but in truth John encompassed the angel who had to announce what humanity really was to become through receiving the Christ impulse. Angels proclaim beforehand what humanity is to become later. So, this passage in the Bible should really read, “Behold, what gives I-hood to the world sends the angel before thee to whom I-hood will be given.”
Now we go on to the third sentence. What does it mean? Here we must call to mind the whole historical world situation. What happened after the astral body gradually lost the ability to extend its forces like tentacles to look clairvoyantly into the spiritual world? Formerly, when the astral body became active, it could see into the spiritual world. This possibility gradually disappeared, and it became dark within human beings. While they could spread their astral body over all the beings of the spiritual world in former times, now they were alone in themselves. Their souls now lived in solitude. That also is in the Greek text. “Behold, what speaks in the solitude—or, if you like, wilderness—of the soul when the astral body could no longer extend out to the divine spiritual world. Listen to what calls in the wilderness and loneliness of the soul.”
What is it that announces itself? Here, we must be clear about the meaning of one particular word when it is used in reference to spiritual or soul phenomena. This was true, above all, in Hebrew, but also in Greek. The word is Kyrios. To translate it as “the Lord,” as is usually done, produces absolute nonsense. What does this word mean? In ancient times everyone who spoke this word knew it meant something that was connected with the progress of the human soul. People knew that the word Kyrios referred to secrets of the soul.
Looking at the astral body, we see that our soul has three distinct forces we call thinking, feeling, and willing. The soul thinks, feels, and wills. These are the three forces working in the soul. They are the serving forces in the soul. Formerly, they had been the lords of humanity, and human beings had been subject to them and had to wait for their thinking, feeling, or willing to be called into action. As human beings evolved, however, these soul forces became subject to the Kyrios, the Lord of the soul forces, the I. When the term Kyrios referred to the soul, nothing else was understood by it than the I. This I no longer believed that the divine spiritual thinks, feels, and wills in it, but “I think, I feel, I will.” The Lord makes himself felt in the forces of the soul. “Prepare yourselves, you human souls, to follow paths that lead you to let the strong I—Kyrios, the Lord—awaken in your souls. Listen to the call in the solitude of the soul. Prepare the force or direction of the Lord of the soul—the I. Make open his forces!” That is roughly how this passage should be translated. “Open up, so that the I can enter and does not become the slave of thinking, feeling, and willing. Open up its forces!” When you translate these words, “Behold, the I sends its angel before you that is to give you the possibility of understanding the calls in the solitude of the astral soul: Prepare the directions of the I, and open the forces for it,” you then have a meaning in these significant words of the prophet Isaiah and a reference to the greatest event in human evolution. You then understand that Isaiah speaks of John the Baptist, that he points out that our soul solitude longs for the approach of the Lord in the soul, the approach of the I. The words have force and weight only when we understand them this way.
Why was John the Baptist able to be the bearer of the Angeloi? He could do this because he had had a certain initiation. Each initiation is specialized. Initiations are not just general, but specialized. Individuals who have a very special task need a particular kind of initiation. Now for everything that occurs in the spiritual world precautions have been taken so that the starry script in the heavens reveals spiritual facts. For example, people could have a sun-initiation and enter into the secrets of the spiritual world that is the realm of Ahura Mazdao, the world for which the sun is the external expression. There are, however, twelve different ways to be initiated into the secrets of the sun; each of these initiations was a “solar initiation,” yet different from the other eleven. Depending upon what a person has to accomplish for humanity, he or she receives an initiation that can be described as a solar initiation but, for example, one where the forces flow in as though the sun were standing in Cancer. This differs from the initiation where the forces flow in as though the sun were standing in Libra. This is how different specialized initiations were designated.
Individuals who have as important a mission as John the Baptist must be initiated in a very special way. Only then will they have the necessary strength to accomplish their mission in the world even in a rather single-minded way if circumstances require that. So, in order for John the Baptist to become the bearer of the Angeloi, he had to undergo the sun-initiation that can be called the initiation in the sign of Aquarius. The sun in Aquarius is a symbol for the initiation John the Baptist received to become the bearer of the angel. He received the force of the sun as it streams down when its relation to the other stars is characterized with the words, “The sun stands in the constellation of Aquarius.” That was the symbol. John had undergone the Aquarius initiation.
The constellation was given the name Aquarius because those who underwent this initiation had the power to do with human beings what John did as the Aquarian, the Baptist. Through immersion in water, he brought people to the point where their etheric bodies were freed sufficiently for them to gain the self-knowledge that allowed them to realize what was most important in their time. People were immersed and their etheric bodies were freed for a moment. Through baptism in the Jordan, people could feel the special importance of this epoch in the history of the world. Therefore, John underwent the baptism initiation. To express symbolically the flowing in of the rays from the constellation in which the sun stood, this sign was called Aquarius. In this way the name of the human capacity is carried over to the heavens.
Today many learned ignoramuses try to interpret spiritual events by bringing the heavens down to earth. They say, “Now, that indicates a forward movement of the sun.” These learned people, who really do not know anything, interpret human events from the heavens. However, it was the other way around. What lives in humanity spiritually was transferred to the heavens; the heavens were used as a means of expression. Thus, John the Baptist could say, “I have baptized you with water,” which was the same as saying, “I baptize you with water: I am endowed with the initiation of Aquarius.” That is what John could have said to his closest disciples. With our senses we see the constellation of Virgo opposite Aquarius, and from there the sun moves to Libra. However, in terms of initiation, the sun proceeds in the opposite direction, not as it appears to our senses. Thus, we have to look at the sun's path from Aquarius to Pisces. John could say, “Something will come that will no longer work in the way that corresponds to the sun's influence in Aquarius; instead, it will work in a way corresponding to the sun's effect in Pisces. One will come who will bring a higher baptism.”
When the spiritual sun rises higher, then the Aquarian baptism becomes a baptism with spiritual water. The sun ascends in the spiritual realm from Aquarius to Pisces, hence the well-known ancient fish symbol for the bearer of Christ. Through special spiritual influences, John had an Aquarian initiation. But the initiation that came about mysteriously through the Mysteries around Jesus, of which I have spoken several times, was a Pisces initiation. It resulted from the sun advancing to the next constellation, and Jesus of Nazareth was integrated into his time through being subjected first to a Pisces initiation.
This is sufficiently indicated in the Gospel of Saint Mark, but such things can only be shown in images. Christ Jesus draws together all those who are fishing, so his first apostles are all fishermen. The advancing of the sun from Aquarius to Pisces is obvious when John tells us, “I have baptized you with water; but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.” When Christ walked along the Sea of Galilee—which means, when the sun was so far advanced that one could see its counterpart coming up from Pisces—the fishermen Simon, Simon's brother, James, and James's brother, were inspired. This can be understood only when we look more closely at the way people expressed things at that time.
Our modern way of expressing ourselves is pedantic. If a person stands before us, we say there is a human being. If a second person stands before us, we again say there is a human being. A third, another, and so on, but we have merely Maya before us. If a being has two legs and a human countenance, then in our pedantic way of expressing ourselves we have only one term, “human being.” However, what is a human being to occultism? Nothing but Maya! He or she is about the same as a rainbow, which lasts only so long as the necessary relationships between rain and sunshine exist. When these relationships change, the rainbow disappears.
It is the same with human beings. A human being is only the streaming together of forces of the macrocosm, forces we find in the heavens, here or there in the macrocosm. Where we usually assume a human being somewhere on earth, there is nothing for the occultist. In fact, forces stream down from above and up from below and intersect. Then, just as the peculiar relationship of rain and sunshine produces the rainbow, so forces streaming out of the macrocosm from above and below result in the phenomenon that looks like a human being. People are nothing as they stand before us. In truth, they are a phantom, Maya, an illusion. It is the cosmic forces, intersecting where our eyes think they see a human being, that are real. Try to take the statement seriously that a human being is nothing as he or she stands before us. A human being is but the shadow of many forces. The being who reveals himself in a person can easily be elsewhere than at that point where the individual in question is walking around on two legs.
For example, consider three men, first, an ancient Persian whose work was plowing. He looked like an ordinary man but actually was one of the souls whose forces were nourished from this or that world, above or below. The second man was an ancient Persian official. He was formed by forces from another world that intersected in him. To know him, we must look at these forces. All of you sitting here are in your reality somewhere else, and only the forces of your real being radiate into this room. Our third example is a Persian of whom we have to say he was really a complete illusion, a phantom. What was there in reality? We must go all the way up to the sun to find the forces that nourished this phantom. There, among the mysteries of the sun, we find what can be called the Golden Star, Zarathustra. It radiates down, and here below stands a figure called Zarathustra. In truth, however, his being is not there at all. This is our third example.
Now, it is important to realize that in ancient times people were aware of the meaning of such designations. Names were not given as they are today. People were named according to what lived in them rather than on the basis of their external, illusory appearance. We must be quite clear about this. We can say that at the time of Christ people would have easily understood what was meant when John the Baptist was referred to as the angel of God. Such a statement would have taken account of what really happened there; it would have focused on the main thing and disregarded secondary considerations.
Let us assume people had spoken about Christ Jesus in the same way. How would they have had to speak of him if they had understood such things? They would not have dreamt of naming the physical body walking around among them Christ Jesus. Rather, the name was the sign that what was streaming down spiritually from the sun was received in a very special way at the point where this physical body was. As this body of Jesus wandered from one place to another, it made visible the sun force as it moves from place to place. This force could also move around alone, and at times it was said that Christ Jesus was in his “home,” that is, in his physical body, but what was in him moved on without his body. Particularly in Saint John's Gospel this expression is used in such a way that, at times, the writer speaks of this being moving purely spiritually exactly as though he were describing this sun force dwelling in a physical body.
It is therefore important that the deeds of Christ Jesus are always seen in relation to the physical sun, which is the external expression of the spiritual world that is received at the point where Christ's physical body is walking around. When Christ Jesus heals, for instance, it is the sun force that heals. However, the sun must be at the right place in the heavens: “That evening, at sundown, they brought to him all who were sick or possessed with demons.” It is important to indicate that this healing power can flow down only when the external sun has set but still works spiritually. And when Christ again needed a certain force for his work, he had to take it from the spiritual rather than from the physical, visible sun. “And in the morning, a great while before day, he rose and went out to a lonely place, and there he prayed.” Here, the path of the sun and the solar force is expressly indicated. It is this solar force that is at work here, and fundamentally Jesus is only the external sign, making the path of the sun forces visible to the physical eye.
Whenever Christ is mentioned in Saint Mark's Gospel, the sun force is meant, which, in that epoch of human evolution, was especially active in Palestine. The sun force could be seen as Christ went from one place to another. We could just as well say that at that time, the spiritual force of the sun, as though focused in one point, went from one place to another. The body of Jesus was the external sign that made the movements of the sun force visible. The paths Jesus took in Palestine were those of the sun force come down to earth. If you trace his steps on a map, you have a diagram of a cosmic event: the influence of the sun force from the macrocosm on the land of Palestine. That macrocosmic aspect is what matters here. The writer of Saint Mark's Gospel points out this macrocosmic connection. He knew that the body serving as the vehicle of a principle such as that of Christ had to be overcome by its principle in a special way. Thus, this gospel points to the world whose existence behind the world of the senses Zarathustra had so powerfully announced; it points to that world as it works on our human world. Through Christ Jesus it was indicated how these forces now work on the earth. Therefore, a kind of repetition of the Zarathustra events had to occur in the body of the Nathan Jesus because it was in a certain way influenced by the individuality of Zarathustra.
Let us recall the beautiful legend about Zarathustra. At his birth, Zarathustra accomplished his first miracle when he showed his famous smile. Later, Duransarun, the king of the district where Zarathustra was born, resolved to murder him because of what some retrograde Magi had told him about the child. However, when the king attempted to stab the child, his arm was paralyzed. That was a second miracle. Then, because the king could not stab him, Zarathustra was left among the wild beasts of the desert. Thus, in earliest childhood Zarathustra experienced what we see when we look out into the world through our impurities. Instead of noble group-soul and higher spiritual beings, we see emanations of our wild fantasy. That is what is meant when we are told that Zarathustra was left among the wild beasts, but remained unharmed. That is the third miracle. The fourth occurred also among the wild animals, and so on. It was always the good spirit of Ahura Mazdao who served Zarathustra and ministered to him.
We find these miracles repeated in the Gospel of Saint Mark. “The Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness [Actually the word is solitude]. And he was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered to him.” This shows us that the body was prepared that was to be the focal point to receive what transpired in the macrocosm. What had happened to Zarathustra had to be repeated, among other things, the time he spent among the wild beasts. This body took in what came from the macrocosm.
Even the first lines of Saint Mark's Gospel take us into the greatest cosmic context. I wanted to show you that if we understand the words in the right sense—not in the sense of our modern philistine language but in that of the ancient languages where living worlds were behind each word—then the Gospel of Saint Mark comes alive again and receives new force. With our modern language, however, it takes many circumlocutions to find again what was simply present in the words in ancient languages. When we say that human beings live on the earth and develop their I, and that they formerly lived on the moon where the angels went through the human stage, we are expressing what lies behind the words, “Behold, I send my angel before human beings.” These words cannot be understood without prior knowledge of what spiritual science offers. People in our time should be honest and admit that the words at the beginning of Saint Mark's Gospel are incomprehensible. Instead, in petty pride they declare spiritual science a fantasy that reads all kinds of things into what they supposedly just know. However, they do not really know it.
Today the principle of rewriting sacred documents for each epoch, as was done in ancient Persia, is no longer practiced. Thus, the divine spiritual word, as presented in the Zend-Avesta, was transformed again and again. The Persian bible was rewritten seven times and what exists today is the last form. Anthroposophy has to teach people how necessary it is to rewrite the books containing the holy secrets in each epoch. For especially if we want to preserve the grand old style, we should not try to stay as close as possible to the ancient wording. That can't be done; the old words are no longer understood. Instead, we must try to translate the ancient wording into the immediate understanding of our time. That is what we have tried to do this summer with the Book of Genesis. You saw that many of the words had to be changed. Perhaps today you have got an idea of how the words must also be changed in the Gospel of Saint 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.