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
What matters is not to let oneself be misled by the fact that
Paracelsus expresses himself in the spirit of his time. It is far more
important to recognise what things really hovered before his mind when,
looking upon Nature, he expresses his ideas in the forms of expression
proper to his age. He ascribes to man, for instance, a dual flesh, that
is, a dual bodily constitution. “The flesh must also be understood,
that it is of two kinds, namely the flesh that comes from Adam and the
flesh which is not from Adam. The flesh from Adam is a gross flesh,
for it is earthly and nothing besides flesh, that can be bound and
grasped like wood and stone. The other flesh is not from Adam, it is
a subtle flesh and cannot be bound or grasped, for it is not made of
earth.” What is the flesh that is from Adam? It is everything that man
has received through natural development, everything, therefore, that
has passed on to him by heredity. To that is added, whatever man has
acquired for himself in his intercourse with the world around him in
the course of time.
The modern scientific conceptions of inherited characteristics and
those acquired by adaptation easily emerge from the above-cited thought
of Paracelsus. The “more subtle flesh” that makes man capable of his
intellectual activities, has not existed from the beginning in man.
Man was “gross flesh” like the animal, a flesh that “can be bound and
grasped like wood and stone.” In a scientific sense, therefore, the
soul is also an acquired characteristic of the “gross flesh.” What
the scientist of the nineteenth century has in his mind’s eye when he
speaks of the factors inherited from the animal world, is just what
Paracelsus has in view when he uses the expression, “the flesh that
comes from Adam.”
Naturally I have not the least intention of blurring the difference
that exists between a scientist of the sixteenth and one of the
nineteenth century. It was, indeed, this latter century which for
the first time was able to see, in the full scientific sense, the
phenomena of living beings in such a connection that their natural
relationship and actual descent, right up to man, stood out clearly
before one’s eyes. Science sees only a natural process where Linnæus
in the eighteenth century saw a spiritual process and characterised it
in the words: “There are counted as many species of living beings, as
there were created different forms in the beginning.” While thus in
Linnæus’s time, the Spirit had still to be transferred into the spacial
world and have assigned to it the task of spiritually generating
the forms of life, or “creating” them: the natural science of the
nineteenth century could give to Nature what belonged to Nature, and
to Spirit what belonged to Spirit. To Nature is even assigned the task
of explaining her own creations; and the Spirit can plunge into itself
there, where alone it is to be found, in the inner being of man.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account