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
Our present age cannot speak about the facts of Nature as Jacob Boehme
spoke of them. But there exists a point of view, even in this present
day, which brings Jacob Boehme’s way of regarding things near to a view
of the world that takes account of modern natural science. There is no
need to lose the Spirit, when one finds in Nature only the natural.
Many do, indeed, believe to-day that one must needs lose oneself in
a shallow and prosaic materialism, if one simply accepts the “facts”
which natural science has discovered. I myself stand fully upon the
ground of this same natural science. I have, through and through, the
feeling that, in a view of Nature such as Ernst Haeckel’s, only he can
lose himself amid shallows who himself approaches it with a shallow
thought-world. I feel something higher, more glorious, when I let the
revelations of the “natural history of creation” work upon me, than
when the supernatural miracle stories of the confessions of faith force
themselves upon me. In no “holy book” do I know aught that unveils for
me anything as lofty as the “sober” fact, that every human germ in
the mother’s womb repeats in brief, one after the other, those animal
types which its animal ancestors have passed through. If only we fill
our hearts with the glory of the facts that our senses behold, then
we shall have little left over for “wonders” which do not lie in the
course of Nature. If we experience the Spirit in ourselves, then we
have no need of such in external Nature.
In my _Philosophy of Freedom_, (Berlin, 1894) I have described my
view of the world, which has no thought of driving out the Spirit,
because it beholds Nature as Darwin and Haeckel beheld her. A plant,
an animal, gains nothing for me if I people it with souls of which my
senses give me no information. I do not seek in the external world for
a “deeper,” “more soulful” being of things; nay, I do not even assume
it, because I believe that the insight which shines forth for me in
my inner being guards me against it. I believe that the things of
the sense-world are, in fact, just as they present themselves to us,
because I see that a right self-knowledge leads us to this: that in
Nature we should seek nothing but natural processes. I seek no Spirit
of God in Nature, because I believe that I perceive the nature of the
human spirit in myself. I calmly admit my animal ancestry, because I
believe myself to know that there, where these animal ancestors have
their origin, no spirit of like nature with soul can work. I can only
agree with Ernst Haeckel when he prefers the “eternal rest of the
grave” to an immortality such as is taught by some religions.[24] For I
find a dishonouring of Spirit, an ugly sin against the Spirit, in the
conception of a soul continuing to exist after the manner of a sensible
being.
[24] Cp. Haeckel’s _Riddle of the Universe_.
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