Yes, in our time it once again becomes so clear how much the world needs anthroposophy as a cultural factor. Now of course one can say: yes, anthroposophy has actually already become known throughout the whole world and in this sense is indeed a cultural factor in many regions worldwide through Waldorf schools, through curative education institutes, and so on. But that is not what I mean. There are also very many people who are enthusiastic about the work of Rudolf Steiner and who take up the content with great energy and even pass it on again, write about it, expand the content themselves, and so on. That is not what I mean either.

For me it is so clear that that which is the being Anthroposophia, that she, this being, actually does not appear at all. She is not a being that primarily has to do with content. She is also not a being that primarily has to do with institutes or boards or schools or whatever else. She is a being that on earth in our time hardly appears at all. And that is what I would like to express again and again: that it is truly time and necessary that this being appears.

And she cannot do this out of her own movement, because she is a being that is directly connected with the human being. And therefore she cannot appear out of herself if human beings do not give her the opportunity to do so. In my Dutch video I pointed out that actually everything always remains the same. This is so in politics, it is so in science, and even in technology, where it seems that an enormous development is taking place, everything actually always remains the same. And this has to do with the fact that this being, Anthroposophia, which is a transforming being, is not wanted. I really must say it like this. I cannot say that she is not recognized, but she is not wanted. And this has to do with the infinite inner laziness of us human beings.

We are not so lazy when it comes to outer work, of course. There are also tasks that we do not like very much and there are also people who are lazy in that respect. But if we think, for example, of sports: if one really wants to practice sports, then one cannot be outwardly lazy, then one must really become active. So the human being has the possibility for a great unfolding of activity. That is not the problem.

The problem lies in inner activity. And it is understandable as well. If we think back to our school days, to our time of study, we will certainly remember how difficult it was to spur ourselves on to study. An exam was approaching and one had to study and one had absolutely no desire to do so. Anything rather than opening those books and finally beginning. And if it should also be the case that the things one reads are to be inwardly reproduced—which one really must do if one wants to get something into one’s memory—then it already becomes rather boring and difficult to begin with it.

And precisely this inner activity that we must bring into play while studying is demanded of us to a much stronger degree if we want to create a stage or a field upon which the being Anthroposophia can appear. She is the being of inner activity, and the human sin of laziness lies above all in this domain. And this leads to the fact that the human being actually has no desire at all to allow Anthroposophia into life.

I can remember that when I became acquainted with anthroposophy, I began my study with The Philosophy of Freedom. And then one enters into a very different kind of thinking from what one is accustomed to, although the thinking itself actually remains the same. It does not become another kind of thinking, but it seems to take place on another level. And one might think that one has already fulfilled the demand for inner activity when one studies or has studied a book like The Philosophy of Freedom. Rudolf Steiner often speaks in his lectures about this book from his youth, The Philosophy of Freedom. And he then speaks about how through the proper study of The Philosophy of Freedom one develops pure thinking. And when one takes up anthroposophy as content, as self-study, then one must naturally ask oneself what he actually means by this, by pure thinking. I believe that he sometimes also said that in The Philosophy of Freedom he speaks or writes about pure thinking. I must check this again, but I do not believe that he actually used these words themselves.

But what is certainly the case is that if one follows the thinking of The Philosophy of Freedom over a longer period through several sections, one then enters into a thinking that no longer contains sensory content. One can also read it differently. One can read it in such a way that one continually interrupts the reading by mixing in one’s own insights. Or that one asks oneself: what does he actually mean? and then comes with one’s own opinions about it. I do not believe that in this way one can enter into what Rudolf Steiner calls pure thinking. I believe that he actually hoped that there would be people who would truly think along section by section. Not so much think afterward, not think about it, but think along with it. Think it as it stands there. And through the years I have worked with very many people on The Philosophy of Freedom. And it has almost always been the case that—well, I do not want to say all people, because that is of course not true—but that many who want to study The Philosophy of Freedom actually hold themselves back by continually stopping the stream of thinking with their own thoughts. And it is of course remarkable that one should read a book in such a way that one oneself remains silent. The human being does not really want that. One always wants to assert oneself in it. But then this bringing into motion of inner activity is continually stopped. It is as if a cyclist stopped every five meters and still believed that he could win a race. That of course is impossible. If one keeps braking oneself every time, it becomes impossible to come into a flow.

And that is precisely what a book like The Philosophy of Freedom could give: that one enters into a stream of thinking that is completely filled with pure thinking. Thus pure thoughts that follow one another in such a way that through them one enters into a continuously formative thinking. There Anthroposophia appears for the first time. And one will then also become aware of it. But usually it does not get that far, because one has no idea that something like this would be necessary in order to co-create a sequence of thoughts selflessly from beginning to end.

This is a capacity that then arises, a capacity that makes it possible that one ultimately develops a stream of thinking within oneself that no longer wants to live in the old forms. A stream of thinking, a flow that makes it possible for one to receive entirely new thoughts. That is of course a leap that I am making now. And I will gladly go further into this leap another time. But the first thing that I would like to set forth today is that Anthroposophia cannot appear in the world if there are no human beings who love inner activity so much that they seek possibilities to become inwardly active. And then a book like The Philosophy of Freedom is indeed a tremendous book for that. But there are of course also other possibilities. A meditation, as anthroposophy gives it, also leads through strong concentration to inner activity. But I do not believe that this anthroposophy already appears in the world. There are many anthroposophists and they speak and write a great deal because they want to bring anthroposophy into the world. But through that anthroposophy does not enter the world. Anthroposophia can only appear in inner activity. And then the anthroposophical content is also transformed. About this I would like to speak many more times.