on any given existence, but on the contrary itself giving laws for that existence, and propose to immerse every child of man in this knowledge from the very beginning, and to keep him from that time onwards continually under its rule. On the other hand, we regard that nature of things which can be learned only from history as an insignificant accessory that follows of' itself. When we do all this, then the ripest products of the old educa tion oppose us, reminding us that it is well known there is no a priori knowledge, and saying they would like to know how there can be any knowledge except through experience. In order that this supersenuous and a priori world should not reveal itself in the place where this seemed unavoidable, namely, in the possibility of a knowledge of God, and that even in God Himself there should be no spiritual spontaneity, but that passive sub mission should remain all in all — to meet this danger the old education has hit upon the daring expedient of making the existence of.God an historical fact, the truth of which is established by the examination of evidence.
So in truth the matter stands; yet our generation should not therefore despair of itself, for these and all other similar phenomena are themselves not independent, but only flowers and fruits of the uncultivated root of the past. If only this generation submits quietly to the 1 grafting of a new, nobler, and stronger root, the old will be killed, and its flower and fruits, deprived of further nourishment, will of themselves wither and fall. As yet ' this generation cannot believe our words; it is inevitable that they seem to it like fairy tales. Nor do we want such belief; we want only room to work and to act. After wards it will see, and it will believe its own eyes.
39. Everyone who is acquainted with the productions of recent years will have noticed long ago that here again those principles and views are expressed which modern German philosophy since its origin has preached again and again, because it could do nothing else but preach. It is now sufficiently clear that these sermons have vanished without result into thin air, and the reason for this is evident too. A living thing affects only something living; but in the actual life of the age there is no rela tionship at all with this philosophy, which goes its own way in a sphere that is not yet revealed to this age, and which calls for sense-organs that it has not yet developed. (This philosophy is not at home in our age, but is an I anticipation of time, and a principle of life ready in advance for a generation which shall first awake to light in it. It must give up all claim on the present genera tion; but, in order not to be idle until then, let it now undertake the task of fashioning for itself the generation to which it does belong. As soon as this, its immediate business, has become clear to it, it will be able to live in peace and friendship with a generation which in other respects does not please it. The education which we have hitherto described is likewise the education for this philosophy. Yet in a certain sense it alone can be the educator in this education; and so it had to be a fore runner neither understood nor acceptable. But the time will come when it will be understood and received with joy; and that is why our generation should not despair of itself.
40. Let this generation hearken to the vision of an ancient prophet in a situation no less lamentable. Thus says the prophet l by the river of Chebar, the comforter of those in captivity, not in their own, but in a foreign land. " The hand of the Lord was upon me, and carried me out in the spirit of the Lord, and set me down in the 1 [Ezekiel xxxvii. i-io. I have used the Authorised Version here.]
midst of the valley which was full of bones, and caused me to pass by them round about: and, behold, there were very many in the open valley; and, lo, they were very dry. And He said unto me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, O Lord God, thou knowest. Again He said unto me, Prophesy upon these bones, and say unto them, O ye dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. Thus saith the Lord God unto these bones, Behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live: and I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring up flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and ye shall live; and ye shall know that I am the Lord. So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone. And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered them above; but there was no breath in them. Then said He unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord God, Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live. So I prophesied as He commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army."
Though the elements of our higher spiritual life may be just as dried up, and though the bonds of our national unity may lie just as torn asunder and as scattered in wild disorder as the bones of the slain in the prophecy, though they may have whitened and dried for centuries in tempests, rainstorms, and burning sunshine, the quickening breath of the spiritual world has not yet ceased to blow. It will take hold, too, of the dead bones of our national body, and join them together, that they / may stand glorious in new 'and radiant life. ' FOURTH ADDRESS THE CHIEF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE GERMANS AND THE OTHER PEOPLES OF TEUTONIC DESCENT (41. WE have said that the means of educating a new race of men, which is being put forward in these addresses, must first be_ applied by Germans to Germans, and that it concerns our nation in a special and peculiar way. This statement also requires proof; and here, as before, we shall begin with what is highest and most general, showing what is the characteristic of the German as such, apart from the fate that has now befallen him; showing, too, that this has been his characteristic ever since^ he began to— exist; ancTpointing out how this fi characteristic in itself gives him alone, above all other f European nations, the capacity of responding to such an I education.
42. In the first place, the German is a branch of the Teutonic race. Of the latter it is sufficient to say here that its mission wasjto_cgmbinejthe socialorder_established in ancient Europe with the true jejigion preserved in ancient jVsia, and in this way to develop in and by itself a new and different age after the ancient world had perished. Further, it is sufficient to distinguish the German particularly, in contrast only to the other Teutonic peoples who came into existence with him. Other neo-European nations, as, for instance, those of Slav descent, do not seem as yet to have developed distinctly enough in comparison with the rest of Europe to make it possible to give a definite description of them; whereas others of the same Teutonic descent, as, for instance, the Scandinavians, although the main reason for differentiation (which will be stated immediately) does not apply to them, are yet ~ regarded here as indisputably Germans, and included in all the general consequences of our observations.
43. But at the very outset the special observations which we are now on the point of making must be pre faced by the following remark. As the cause of the differentiation that has taken place in what was originally one stock I shall cite an event which, considered merely as an event, lies clear and incontestable before the eyes of all. I shall then adduce some manifestations of the differentiation that has taken place; and these manifesta tions, considered merely as events, could perhaps be made just as clear and obvious. But with regard to the connection of the latter, as consequences, with the former, as their cause, and with regard to the deduction of the consequences from the cause, I cannot, speaking generally, reckon upon being equally clear and con vincing to everyone. It is true that in this matter also I am not making entirely new statements which no one has heard of before; on the contrary, there are among us many individuals who are either well prepared for such a view of the matter, or perhaps already familiar with it. Among the majority, however, there are in circulation ideas about the subject of our discussion which differ greatly from our own. To correct such ideas, and to refute all the objections to single points that might be raised by those who are not practised in taking a comprehensive view of a subject, would far exceed the limits of our time and our intention. I must content myself with placing before such people, merely as a subject for their further consideration, what I have to say in this connection, remarking that in my system of thought it does not stand so separate and detached as it appears in this place, nor is it without a foundation in the depths of knowledge. I could not omit it entirely, partly on account of the thoroughness of treatment demanded by my whole subject, and partly because of its important consequences, which will appear later in the course of our addresses, and which are intimately connected with our present design.
44. The first and immediately obvious difference between the fortunes of t^e Germans and the other branches which grew from the same root is this: the former remained in the original^ dwelling-places of the ancestraLstpck, whereas the latter emigrated to other places; the former retained and developed the original language. of the ancestral stock, whereas the latter adopted a foreign language and gradually reshaped it in a way of their own. This earliest difference must be regarded as the explanation of those which came later, e.g., that in /fKe originaTtattefferTd^in accordance with Teutonic primitive custom, there continuecTtirfaea, federation of LStateTunS^fTTieaa^vSh limite3Tpowefs7wEereaT in the foreign countries the form of government was brought more in accordance with the existing Roman method, and monarchies were established, etc. It is not these later differences that explain the one first mentioned.
45. Now, of the changes which have been indicated, the first, the change of home, is quite unimportant. Man easily makes himself at home under any sky, and the changed by the place of abode, dominates and changes the latter after its own pattern. Moreover, the variety of natural influences in the region inhabitated by the Teutons is not very great. Just as little importance should be attached to the fact that the Teutonic race has inter mingled with the former inhabitants of the countries it conquered; for, after all, the victors and masters and makers of the new people that arose from this inter mingling were none but Teutons. Moreover, in the mother-country there was an intermingling with Slavs similar to that which took place abroad with Gauls, Cantabrians, etc., and perhaps of no less extent; so that it would not be easy at the present day for any one of the peoples descended from Teutons to demonstrate a greater purity of descent than the others.
46. More important, however, and in my opinion the cause of a complete contrast between the Germans and the other peoples of Teutonic descent, is the second change, the change ~o,f language. Here, as I wish to point out distinctly at the very beginning, fit is not a question of the special quality of the language retained by the one branch or adopted by the other; on the contrary, the importance lies solely in the fact that in the one case something native is_retained, while in the~ other case something ^foreign is adopted. Nor is it a question of the previous ancestry of those who continue to speak an original language; on the contrary, the importance lies solely in the fact that this language continues to be spoken, for,rjiejfl are formed b^Janguage far more than""] language is formed by men.
47. In order to make clear, so far as explanation is possible and necessary in this place, the consequences of such a difference in the creation of peoples, and to make clear the particular kind of contrast in national character istics that necessarily follows from this difference, I must invite you to a consideration of the nature of language in general.
Language in general, and especially the designation of objects in language by sounds from the organs of speech, is in no way dependent on arbitrary decisions and agreements. On the contrary there is, to begin with, a fundamental law, in accordance with which every idea becomes in the human organs of speech one particular sound and no other. Just as objects are represented in the sense-organs of an individual by a definite form, colour, etc., so they are represented in language, which is the organ of social man, by a definite sound. It is not really man that speaks, but human nature speaks in him and announces itself to others of his kind. Hence one should say: There is and can be but one single language.
Now indeed, and this is the second point, language in this unity for man, simply as man, may never and no where have arisen. Everywhere it may have been further changed and formed by two groups of influences; firstly, those exerted on the organs of speech by the locality and by more or less frequent use, and, secondly, those exerted on the order of the designations by the order in which..obj.ec±s_^vere observed and, designated. Never theless, in this also there is no chance or arbitrariness, but strict law; and in an organ of speech thus affected by the conditions mentioned there necessarily arises, not the one pure human language, but a deviation therefrom, and, moreover, this particular deviation and no other.
If we give the name of people to men whose_organs of speech -are influenced by the same external conditions, who live together, and who develop their language in continuous communication with each other, then we must say: The language of this people is necessarily just what it is, and in reality this people does not express its knowledge, but its knowledge expresses itself out of the mouth of the people.
48. Despite all the changes brought about, as the language progresses, by the circumstances mentioned above, this conformity with law remains uninterrupted; and indeed, for all who remain in uninterrupted com munication, and who all hear in due course whatever any individual for the first time expresses, there is one and the same conformity with law. After thousands of years, and after all the changes undergone in that time by the external manifestation of the language of this people, it ever remains nature's one, same, living power of speech, which in the beginning necessarily arose in the way it did, which has flowed down through all conditions without interruption, and in each necessarily became what it did become, which in the end necessarily was what it now is, and in time to come necessarily will be what it then will be. The pure human language, in conjunction^ first with the speech-organ of the people when its first sound was uttered, and the product of these, in conjunc tion further with all the developments which this first sound in the given circumstances necessarily acquiredall this together gives as its final result the present language of the people. For that reason, too, the language always remains the same language. Even though, after some centuries have passed7The descendants do not understand the language of their ancestors, because for them the transitions have been lost, nevertheless there is from the beginning a continuous transition without a leap, a transition^ always imperceptible at the time, and only made perceptible when further transitions occur and the whole process appears as a leap forward. There has never been a time when contemporaries ceased to understand each other, for their eternal go-between and interpreter always was, and has continued to be, the common power of nature speaking through them all. Such is the condition of language, considered as the designation of objects directly perceived by the senses; and in the beginning all human language is this. When the people raises itself from this stage of sensuous perception to a grasp of the supersensuous, then, if this supersensuous is to be repeated at will and kept from being confused with the sensuous by the first individual, and if it is to be com municated to others for their convenience and guidance, the only way at first to keep firm hold of it will be to designate a Self as the instrument of a supersensuous world and to distinguish it precisely from the same Self as the instrument of the sensuous world — to contrast a soul, a mind, etc., with a physical body. As all the various objects of this supersensuous world appear only in and exist for that supersensuous instrument, the only possible way of designating them in language would be to say that their special relation to their instrument is similar to the relation of such-and-such particular sensuous objects to the sensuous instrument, and in this relation to compare a particular supersensuous thing with a particular sensuous one, using this comparison to indicate by language the place of the supersensuous thing in the supersensuous instrument. In this sphere language has no further power; it gives a sensuous image of the supersensuous thing, merely with the remark that it is an image of that kind; he who wishes to attain to the thing itself must set his own mental instrument in motion according to the rule given him by the image. Speaking T generally, it is evident that this designation of the supersensuous by means^of^jensuous images must in every -bertogcTitioned by the stage of development which the power of sensuo'us perception has reached in the p.eople under -consideration. Hence, the origin and pro gress of this designation by sensuous images will be very different in different languages and will depend on the difference in the relation that has existed and continues to exist between the sensuous and intellectual develop ment of the people speaking a language.
49. We shall next illustrate this observation, clear though it is in itself, by an example. Anything that arises, according to the conception of the fundamental impulse explained in the preceding address, directly in clear perception and not in the first place in dim feeling— anything of this kind, and it is always a supersensuous object, is denoted by a Greek word which is frequently used in the German language also; it is called an Idea [German, Idee\; and this word conveys exactly the same sensuous image as the word Gesicbt in German, which occurs in the following expressions in Luther's translation of the Bible: Ye shall see visions \Gesicb te\9 ye shall dream dreams. Idea or Vision, in its sensuous meaning, would be something that could be perceived only by the bodily eye and not by any other sense such as taste, hearing, etc.; it would be such a thing as a rainbow, or the forms which pass before us in dreams. Idea or Vision, in its supersensuous meaning, would denote, first of all, in conformity with the sphere in which the word is to be valid, something that cannot be perceived by the body at all, but only by the mind; and then, something that cannot, as many other things can, be perceived by the dim feeling of the mind, but only by the eye of the mind, by clear perception. Further, even if one were inclined to assume that for the Greeks the basis of this sensuous designation was certainly the rainbow and similar phenomena, one would have to admit that their sensuous perception had already advanced to the stage of noticing this difference between things, viz., that some reveal themselves to all or several senses and others to the eye alone, and that, besides, if the developed conception had become clear to them, they would have had to desig nate it not in this way but in some other. Also their superior mental clearness would then be evident as compared, say, with that of another people which was not able to indicate the difference between the sensuous and the supersensuous by an image taken from the deliberate waking state, but had gone to dreams to find an image for another world. It would at the same time be plain that this difference was not based on the greater or smaller strength of the sense for the supersensuous in the two peoples, but solely on the difference between their sensuous clearness at the time when they sought to desig nate supersensuous things.
/ 50. Thus all designation of the supersensuous is con ditioned by the extent and clearness of sensuous percep tion in him who gives the designation. The image is clear to him and expresses to him in an entirely com prehensible way the relation of the thing conceived to the' mental instrument, because this relation is explained to him by another, direct, and living relation to his sensuous instrument. The new designation which thus arises, together with all the new clearness which sensuous perception itself acquires by this extended use of the sign, is now deposited in the language; and the supersensuous perception possible in the future is now designated in accordance with its relation to the total supersensuous and sensuous perception deposited in the whole language. So it goes on without interruption, and so the immediate clearness and comprehensibility of the images is never broken off, but remains a continuous stream. More over, since language is not an arbitrary means of com munication, but breaks forth out of the life of under standing as an immediate force of nature, a language continuously developed according to this law has alsothe' power oT immediately affecting and stimulating life. Just as things immediately present influence man, so must the words of such a language influence him who understands them; for they, too, are things, and not an arbitrary contrivance. Such is the case first in the sensuous world. Nor is it otherwise in the supersensuous; for, although in the latter the continuous process of observ ing nature is interrupted by free contemplation and reflection, and at this point God who is without image appears, yet designation by language at once inserts the Thing-without-image in the continuous connection of things which have an image. So, in this respect also, the continuous progress of language, which broke forth in the beginning as a force of nature, remains uninter rupted, and into the stream of designation no arbitrari ness enters. For the same reason the supersensuous part of a language thus continuously developed cannot lose its power of stimulating life in him who but sets his mental instrument in motion. The words of such a language in all its parts are life and create life. Now if, in respect of the development of the language for what is supersensuous, we make the assumption that the people i of this language have continued in unbroken communica- 1 tion, and that what oiTte has thought and expressed^ has j before long come to the knowledge of all, then what has / previously been said in general is valid for all who speak / this language. ±o all who will but think the image' deposited in the language is clear; to all who really think it is alive and stimulates their life.
51. Such is the case, I say, with a language which, from the time the first sound broke forth among the same people, has developed continuously out of the actual common life of this people, and into which no element has ever entered that did not express an observation actually experienced by this people, and, moreover, an observation standing in a connection of wide-spread reciprocal influence with all the other observations of the same people. It does not matter if ever so many -.individuals of other race and other language are incorpora-I ted with the people speaking this language"; provided the former are not permitted to bring the sphere of their observations up to the position from which the language is thereafter to develop, they remain dumb in the com munity and without influence on the language, until the time comes when they themselves have entered into the sphere of observation of the original people. Hence I they do not form the language; it is the language which forms them.
- -»52. But the exact opposite of all that has so far been ( said takes place~when~!Tpeople gives up its own language ) and adopts a foreign one which is already highly developed '• as regards the designation of supersensuous things. I do not mean when it yields itself quite freely to the influence of this foreign language and is quite content to remain without a language until it has entered into the circle of observation of this foreign language, but when it forces its own circle of observation on the adopted language, which, when it develops from the position in which they found it, must thenceforward proceed in this circle of observation. In respect of the sensuous part of the language, such an event, indeed, is without con sequences. For among every people the children must in any case learn that part of the language just as if the signs were arbitrary, and thus recapitulate in this matter the whole previous linguistic development of the nation. But in this sphere of the senses every sign can be made quite clear by directly looking at or touching the thing GERMANS & OTHER TEUTONS COMPARED 6y designated. At most, the result of this would be that the first generation of a people which thus changed its language would be compelled when adults to go back to the years of childhood; with their descendants, however, and with subsequent generations, everything would doubtless be in the old order again. On the other hand, this change has consequences of the greatest impor tance in respect of the supersensuous part of the language. For the first possessors of the language this part was formed in the way already described; but, for those who acquire the language later, the verbal image contains a comparison with an observation of the senses, which they have either passed over long ago without the accom panying mental development, or else have not yet had, and perhaps never can have. The most that they can do in such a case is to let the verbal image and its^ mental significance explain each other; in this way they receive the flat and dead history of a foreign culture but not in any way a culture of their own. They ger symbols which for them are neither immediately clear nor able to stimulate life, but which must seem to them entirely as arbitrary as the sensuous part of the language.
For them this advent of history, and nothing but history, as expositor, makes the language dead and closed in respect (A of its whole sphere of imagery, and its continuous onward flow is broken off. Although, beyond this sphere, they^ may again develop the language as a living language in their own way and so far as this is possible from such a starting-point, nevertheless that element remains a dividing wall at which, without exception, language in its original emergence from life as a force of nature and the actual language's renewal of contact with life are broken. Although such a language may be stirred on the surface by the wind of life and thus present the appearance of I ^4 ADDRESSES TO THE GERMAN NATION having a life of its own, nevertheless it has a dead element deeper down, and by the entrance of the new circle of observation and the breach with the old one it is cut off from the living root.