Mystics of the Renaissance and their relation to modern thought, including Meister Eckhart, Tauler, Paracelsus, Jacob Boehme, Giordano Bruno, and othersSteiner, Rudolf
Religion
Mystics of the Renaissance and their relation to modern thought, including Meister Eckhart, Tauler, Paracelsus, Jacob Boehme, Giordano Bruno, and others
Steiner, Rudolf
Mysticism
The barrier between myself and the outer world falls through this
spiritual conception of things. I am separated from the external world
in so far as I am a thing of the senses among other things of the
senses. Colour and my eye are two different entities. My brain and a
plant are two different things. But the ideal content of the plant and
of colour belong together with the ideal content of my brain and eye
alike to a single ideal entity.
This way of looking at things must not be confused with the very
widespread anthropomorphising conception of the world, which imagines
that it grasps the objects of the outer world by ascribing to them
qualities of a physical nature, which are supposed to resemble the
qualities of the human soul. This view asserts: When we meet another
human being, we perceive in him only sensuous characteristics. I
cannot see into my fellow-man’s inner life. I infer from what I see and
hear of him, his inner life, his soul. Thus the soul is never anything
which I can directly perceive; I perceive a soul only within myself.
My thoughts, my imaginations, my feelings, no man sees. Now just as I
have such an inner life, alongside of the life which can be outwardly
perceived, so, too, all other beings must have such an inner life.
Thus concludes one who occupies the standpoint of the anthropomorphising
conception of the world. What I perceive externally in the plant, must
equally be the outer side of something inward, of a soul, which I must
add in my imagination to what I actually perceive. And since for me
there exists but one single inner world, namely, my own, therefore I
can conceive of the inner world of other beings only as resembling my
own inner world. Along this line of argument one comes to a sort of
universal ensouling of all nature (Pan-psychism).
This view depends, however, on a failure to recognise what the awakened
inner sense really gives us. The spiritual (_geistig_) content of an
external object, which reveals itself to me in my inner self, is not
anything added in or by thought to the outer perception. It is just as
little this as is the spirit of another man. I perceive this spiritual
content through the inner sense just in the same way as I perceive its
physical content through the external senses. And what I call my inner
life in the above sense (_i.e._, thoughts, feelings, etc.), is not at
all in the higher sense, my spirit (_Geist_). This so-called inner
life is only the outcome of purely sensuous processes, and belongs to
me only as a purely individual personality, which is nothing more than
the result of its physical organisation. If I transfer this inner life
to outer things, I am, as a matter of fact, thinking in the air.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account