0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)
84 просмотров9 страниц
1. The universe exists fully within every single human being, though it is difficult for humans to comprehend this due to their earthly limitations of perceiving space and time. When humans leave their physical bodies, they go inward into spiritual worlds that have no separation.
2. All forms of matter that humans perceive are merely reflections of the true spiritual universe within. Splitting the atom may help reveal secrets of how the entire universe exists within by opening doors to higher spiritual dimensions.
3. Advanced spiritual beings can dissolve their individuality and merge with the divine flow, experiencing a state of pure being, though they maintain their I-consciousness and later reconstitute themselves as complete spiritual forms through the active, creative element of
1. The universe exists fully within every single human being, though it is difficult for humans to comprehend this due to their earthly limitations of perceiving space and time. When humans leave their physical bodies, they go inward into spiritual worlds that have no separation.
2. All forms of matter that humans perceive are merely reflections of the true spiritual universe within. Splitting the atom may help reveal secrets of how the entire universe exists within by opening doors to higher spiritual dimensions.
3. Advanced spiritual beings can dissolve their individuality and merge with the divine flow, experiencing a state of pure being, though they maintain their I-consciousness and later reconstitute themselves as complete spiritual forms through the active, creative element of
1. The universe exists fully within every single human being, though it is difficult for humans to comprehend this due to their earthly limitations of perceiving space and time. When humans leave their physical bodies, they go inward into spiritual worlds that have no separation.
2. All forms of matter that humans perceive are merely reflections of the true spiritual universe within. Splitting the atom may help reveal secrets of how the entire universe exists within by opening doors to higher spiritual dimensions.
3. Advanced spiritual beings can dissolve their individuality and merge with the divine flow, experiencing a state of pure being, though they maintain their I-consciousness and later reconstitute themselves as complete spiritual forms through the active, creative element of
Pathwork Guide Lecture No. 10 | August 19, 1957 I greet you in Gods na!e, !y dear "riends. I #ring you #$essings. It is genera$$y di""icu$t to understand the rea$ !eaning o" the teaching that the %ingdo! o" God is within, &ust as 'e$$ is within, too. (ou i!agine that this re"ers to a !ood and there"ore to so!e unrea$ thing that cannot #e gras)ed. Peo)$e on$y take "or rea$ what they can see and touch* "ee$ing states cannot #e seen or touched. +hen we e,)$ain to you that thoughts and "ee$ings are "or!s, it #eco!es so!ewhat easier "or you to understand that these "or!s #ui$d corres)onding s)heres. Landsca)es, surroundings, c$othes, whate-er it is, are in har!ony or in dishar!ony with a$$ the in. #etween gradations. /his e,)$anation, howe-er, sti$$ !ay not !ake it c$ear how a$$ this can e,ist within. 'u!an #eings #e$ie-e that there is no s)ace within "or $andsca)es and s)heres, and di""icu$t as it is to e,)$ain this with words, I sti$$ want to try to $ead you to "urther insight into s)iritua$ states. 0ust as ti!e on earth is entire$y di""erent "ro! its true rea$ity in s)irit, so it is with s)ace a$so. 1)atia$ di!ensions $ike a#o-e, #e$ow, right, or $e"t are conce)ts that you can gras) in your earth$y ha#itat, #ut they do not e,ist in that way in the s)iritua$ di!ension. +hen hu!an #eings di-est the!se$-es o" their #odies, they go inward into the s)iritua$ wor$ds, #ecause the who$e uni-erse is actua$$y within the hu!an #eing. /his is a "act. 2ay#e you can understand the conce)t i" I gi-e you an e,a!)$e, howe-er insu""icient3 /hink o" o)era g$asses into which you $ook "ro! the wrong end so that e-erything #eco!es -ery s!a$$. /hen this $itt$e )icture wi$$ #e the rea$ity according to your understanding. Now, you !ight )ose the 4uestion how the entire uni-erse, with its -ast si5e, cou$d e,ist in e-ery hu!an #eing. I wou$d answer you in the "o$$owing !anner3 (our earth$y wor$d is not the actua$ rea$ity, not e-en in a "igurati-e, sy!#o$ic sense* it is on$y a re"$ection, an i!age in a !irror, a )ro&ection o" the rea$. /he #ody, which houses the s)irit, #rings a#out a se)aration. /he !o!ent the se)arating wa$$ "a$$s #ecause you $ea-e your #ody #ehind, the uni-erse that e,ists in e-ery sing$e hu!an #eing uni"ies6 o" course on condition that you ha-e de-e$o)ed yourse$" "ar enough to reach the s)heres where there is no $onger any se)aration. /he $ower the s)here in which an entity "inds itse$"6#e it in the here. and.now or in the #eyond6the !ore radica$ !ust #e the se)aration. 7ecause o" the $i!itations o" hu!an s)eech when s)iritua$ !atters are concerned, I can )ro-ide #ut a sketchy out$ine, which cannot #e !ore than an ana$ogy. It cou$d, howe-er, $ead you to !editate on the idea that 'ea-en and 'e$$ and a$$ that is in.#etween is within you. +hat the teaching descri#es is not on$y an e!otiona$ state the way you )eo)$e i!agine it, neither is it so!ething a#stract. 8-erything that "or you is an a#straction is concrete in s)irit* e-erything that "or you is "or!$ess, is "or! in s)irit, "or! co!)osed o" higher !atter. /he di""icu$ty you !ay "irst encounter in understanding that the earth$y !atter which you can touch is on$y a !irror i!age or re"$ection o" the uni-erse "u$$y )resent in e-ery sing$e hu!an sou$, can )erha)s #e o-erco!e to a certain degree #y !editating on !y words. Is there a 4uestion on this to)ic9 :;81/I<N3 (es. In connection with this idea, I wou$d $ike to ask a#out the ato! which cannot #e seen #y any#ody. 1cientists say that it is the s!a$$est unit that !ay #e gras)ed #y the hu!an #rain, which !eans that there is nothing s!a$$er. /he state!ent was !ade that i" hu!ans can s)$it the ato!, they can co!e u)on the secrets o" the uni-erse. AN1+8=3 As you understood correct$y, the s)$itting o" the ato! is re$ated to the idea which I ha-e &ust atte!)ted to descri#e, howe-er i!)er"ect$y, that what you e,)erience as !atter is on$y a re"$ection o" the uni-erse within your sou$. Perha)s an ato!ic )hysicist wou$d understand it #etter, #ecause he knows e,act$y what is the signi"icance o" the di""erent orders o" !agnitude. /o say that the ato! is the s!a$$est !eans, o" course, that it is the s!a$$est in hu!an !easure!ent* it is the s!a$$est you can gras). In s)irit, howe-er, the s!a$$est is a$so the $argest. >or you this is di""icu$t to co!)rehend, #ut you ha-e intuited that the conce)ts are re$ated. +hen one says that the s)$itting o" the ato!s wi$$ re-ea$ the secrets o" the uni-erse, this is what is !eant. A$$ this o)ens the door so!ewhat* it raises the -ei$ a $itt$e !ore. ;nti$ now )eo)$e were in"$uenced #y the doctrines o" the churches to #e$ie-e that e-erything is outside3 'e$$ #eneath and 'ea-en a#o-e. +hen )eo)$e read in 1cri)ture that 'ea-en is within, they think that on$y a !ood is !eant. 1o here is a contradiction. Actua$$y, nuc$ear )hysics casts a $ight on the contradiction that re-ea$s that #oth ta$k a#out the sa!e3 that e!otiona$ states are actua$$y s)iritua$ s)heres which are "ound within the hu!an #eing. 7eyond a certain de-e$o)!ent, e-ery sing$e s)iritua$ #eing reaches a stage o" )uri"ication where it is ca)a#$e o" surrendering to the di-ine "$ow, disso$-e itse$", and !e$t into it. And it can a$so reconstitute these "$uid threads so that it again #eco!es an entity o" "or! and sha)e6a$though o" such "ine su#stance that #eings who ha-e not yet reached a high state o" de-e$o)!ent cannot )ercei-e it. 8-eryone can e,)erience a "aint echo o" this #$iss"u$ "ee$ing o" !e$ting into oneness when o-ertaken #y a "ee$ing o" i!!ense #$iss. (ou can )erha)s sense how !uch $onging there is in you to disso$-e the se$", not on$y in the union o" $o-e, #ut a$so in a$$ the great e,)eriences o" the sou$ when it is $i"ted high and c$ose to God, in whate-er way this !ay ha))en, through nature, !usic, !editation, or si!)$y when the #reath o" God touches the hu!an #eing. /hen you rea$$y "ee$ that your #ody $i!its you, and you wish to #reak the $i!its so that you can surrender to the strea! and !ing$e with it. Perha)s you ha-e ne-er thought o" it in these ter!s, #ut you )ro#a#$y wi$$ con"ir! that at ti!es you ha-e known such "ee$ings. /he $ess )uri"ied the sou$ is6and I do not on$y re"er to "au$ts and weaknesses #ut a$so to an,ieties and unhea$thy currents6the !ore the )erson "ears se$".surrender, in s)ite o" yearning "or it. /he !ore s)iritua$i5ed the sou$, the $ess it wi$$ ste! against the surrender. 1o!e hu!an )hi$oso)hies ha-e actua$$y gras)ed this. /hrough such insight, these )hi$oso)hies ha-e co!e to the conc$usion that this state is the "ina$ destination o" hu!anity. 'owe-er, this is not true. A$though there is a !e$ting and disso$-ing, the indi-idua$ity, the I.consciousness is not $ost. Again and again, as I said #e"ore, those #eings wi$$ contract the "$uida$ threads and "ro! the state o" )ure being !o-e into the state o" doing. In the state o" doing one has to #eco!e a co!)$ete and har!onious "or!. And since God is creator6that is, doer6this )rocess takes )$ace in 'i!, too. /he acti-e e$e!ent o" God that creates contracts o-er and o-er again into the )urest and !ost )er"ect "or!. /hus the e$e!ent o" God that si!)$y is and sustains, conse4uent$y a$so disso$-es itse$". /hese conce)ts are e,tre!e$y di""icu$t "or you hu!an #eings to integrate into your understanding, #ut I ho)e !y words can s)ark a "$ash o" insight. And )erha)s they !ight a$so answer a 4uestion one o" !y dear "riends once asked !e and that I did not co!)$ete$y answer at the ti!e. ?o you understand9 =81P<N183 (es. In Indian )hi$oso)hy, it is c$ear$y e,)ressed, as "ar as we can understand it. AN1+8=3 (es. At the sa!e ti!e, I a! e,)$aining a contradiction that is inherent in hu!an understanding. It a$so touches on the su#&ect o" dua$is! and !onis!. Peo)$e who ha-e had a God. e,)erience in the state o" #eing, in the state o" disso$ution, su))ose that that is the on$y and "ina$ truth. <thers, howe-er, who ha-e e,)erienced God in 'is other !ani"estation, as "or!, as creator, #e$ie-e that this is the u$ti!ate truth. 'ere is the origin o" the contradiction, and I te$$ you that #oth God.e,)eriences are e4ua$$y true. 8ach di-ine as)ect !ust a$so contain #eingness, #ut not a$ways, "or "ro! ti!e to ti!e it can #e disso$-ed. /his does not ha))en ar#itrari$y, #ut in a $aw"u$ rhyth!, as it is with a$$ higher #eings. /hese as)ects o" God are what you wou$d ca$$ )ersona$ities. :;81/I<N3 Is this what is !eant with the in#reath and out#reath o" )rana, that is connected with our own #reathing in a certain rhyth!9 AN1+8=3 :uite true. And your rhyth! can #e )$ugged into the cos!ic rhyth!. :;81/I<N3 And #ecause o" this the )rana and the #reathing are the !ost i!)ortant $i"e "unctions. AN1+8=3 =ight. (ou can "ind !any !ore insights when you !editate on these words. And now, !y dear ones, as you !ay ha-e !any 4uestions o" genera$ i!)ortance, I wou$d $ike to continue in the 4uestion and answer "or!. :;81/I<N3 As an authority whose o)inion I ho$d in high regard, wou$d you say that it is desira#$e "or +esterners to !editate on the dro) and the ice#erg or on the ice#erg and the water, which in Indian teachings is -ery !uch reco!!ended9 <r is this )erha)s not good "or +esterners9 AN1+8=3 I cannot genera$i5e. It de)ends tota$$y on the indi-idua$. A !editation $ike that can #e a key "or a )articu$ar indi-idua$. 'owe-er, i" one ga-e such a !editation to a )erson who has not reached a )articu$ar $e-e$, or e$se is o" a di""erent character ty)e, the !editation wou$d not #e o" any rea$ he$). 'ere too one has to re$y on intuition and ins)iration. :;81/I<N3 Perha)s he wou$d need $oosening e,ercises9 AN1+8=3 (es, -ery true. It a$ways de)ends on what the )ersons )ro#$e!s are. <ne shou$d ne-er assign !editation on a rigid )attern rather than considering what the )ersons )ro#$e! is. A#o-e e-erything e$se, where are the inner #$ocks, "au$ts, and weaknesses9 /he chie" $i"e.con"$icts a$ways originate there. :;81/I<N3 Peo)$e who are too strong$y rooted in !atter and ha-e !any earth signs in their astro$ogica$ chart can to$erate this kind o" !editation #etter than )eo)$e who ha-e !ore water or "ire signs. +here there is too !uch o" air, water, and "ire, this !editation wi$$ #e wrong. Is this correct9 AN1+8=3 (es, this is -ery true. :;81/I<N3 @an I ask the "o$$owing 4uestion3 /he genera$ conce)tion and teaching is that incarnations change "ro! !a$e incarnation to "e!a$e and -ice -ersa. @an you c$ari"y this )oint "or !e9 AN1+8=3 >unda!enta$$y, each #eing is !a$e or "e!a$e, and in !ost incarnations the entities "o$$ow their #asic nature. 'owe-er, in so!e cases it is necessary to e,)erience incarnating as the other se,. Let !e e,)$ain3 7e"ore the >a$$6the se)aration "ro! God6a$$ #eings were uni"ied, enco!)assing within the!se$-es #oth the acti-e and rece)ti-e, that is, !a$e and "e!a$e, as)ects. (ou a$$ know that u$ti!ate$y uni"ication !ust ha))en and the se)arated ha$-es wi$$ co!e together and "or! one #eing. /his ha))ens on$y a"ter the necessity to incarnate has #een o-erco!e6o"ten e-en !uch $ater, when the !a$e and "e!a$e e$e!ents ha-e #eco!e one. /he >a$$ is the se)aration "ro! the <ne, "ro! God, and at the sa!e ti!e a #reaking into two "o$$owed #y !any "urther s)$its and "rag!entations. /his e,)$ains the origin o" the ani!a$, )$ant, and !inera$ kingdo!s. /here the s)$its e,tend "urther and "urther into s!a$$er and s!a$$er )arts. /his, howe-er, is an additiona$ e,)$anation. Now I return to your 4uestion. I!agine the uni"ied #eing, in which the !a$e and "e!a$e )arts are integrated, in the sha)e o" a #a$$6#ut )$ease do not take this too $itera$$y. I cannot )resent this otherwise, #ecause i" I tried, you wou$d $ack the conce)ts and I the words. <ne side o" the #a$$ is the )ositi-e, !ascu$ine )rinci)$e, the other the negati-e, "e!inine )rinci)$e6and I ask you not to take the word Anegati-eB as a -a$ue &udg!ent. /he !a$e e$e!ent is the creator, the )ositi-e, acti-e )rinci)$e. +hen God, with the )ur)ose o" acti-e creation, contracts into "or!, then the !ascu$ine )rinci)$e is at work. /he "e!inine, rece)ti-e )rinci)$e, is what disso$-es itse$", s$ow$y and continuous$y #ui$ding, growing. It e,ists in nature as the !othering )rinci)$e which does not create with one act #ut is continuous$y a""ecting e-erything, and that si!)$y rests in its #eing. 7oth )rinci)$es can #e "ound in end$ess di-ersity in a$$ creati-e !ani"estations. @onse4uent$y, they can a$so #e "ound in the integrated twin entities in which #oth the !a$e and "e!a$e )o$es are contained. God has created the! #oth in )er"ection, each in its own essence. /here"ore, it is not right "or the !a$e )rinci)$e to take on "e!a$e "unctions, and -ice -ersa. /hink #ack again to the #a$$. <ne side is the )ositi-e, !ascu$ine )rinci)$e, the other side the negati-e, "e!inine )rinci)$e. +hen they are #rought into unity, they #oth work in co!)$ete har!ony. As the s)$itting took )$ace, the ha$-es were rare$y s)$it a)art e,act$y in the !idd$e. /he #reaking a)art was the resu$t o" the se)aration "ro! God, and this was a chaotic e-ent which did not #e$ong in Gods )er"ect order. As a resu$t, the #reak did not occur either in an order$y "ashion. /here"ore the "au$t cou$d a))ortion to the "e!inine )art what shou$d #e !ascu$ine, and -ice -ersa, in an ar#itrary "ashion. In the de-e$o)!ent that takes the s)irits #ack to God the s)$it has to e-en out3 +hat #e$ongs to the !ascu$ine )rinci)$e #ut has gone o-er to the "e!inine side has to incarnate in the o))osite side, that is, as a !an. /he !ore irregu$ar the s)$itting, the !ore o"ten the entity has to incarnate as a !an to esta#$ish the origina$ #a$ance. I" you knew how !any incarnations you $i-ed as a !a$e or a "e!a$e, you wou$d know in what !anner your s)$itting occurred. /o re)eat3 8-ery #eing re)resents "unda!enta$$y either the !a$e or the "e!a$e )rinci)$e and either the one or the other do!inates his or her #eing. It wou$d not !ake sense "or the hea$thy and har!onious "e!inine to change o-er to the !ascu$ine, "or #oth are di-ine and each in its own way is )er"ect. :;81/I<N3 2ust not e-eryone go through the e,)erience o" what it !eans to #e a wo!an or a !an9 AN1+8=3 No, not necessari$y. I" the s)$it took )$ace e,act$y a$ong the ha$"way $ine, the incarnation as the o))osite se, wou$d not #e necessary. :;81/I<N3 Are there entities who s)$it e,act$y a$ong the !idd$e9 AN1+8=3 'ard$y* -ery rare$y. 7ut as I said, there are s)$its where the ang$e is not so wide, where the de-iations "ro! the !idd$e $ine are re$ati-e$y s!a$$, and where $ess o" a co!)ensation is needed. /he )ur)ose o" a$ternating incarnations is not to gather e,)eriences. I" you !editate on this, you wi$$ ha-e to rea$i5e that the e,)erience in the s)irit, the s)iritua$ de-e$o)!ent toward )er"ection has nothing to do with #eing a !an or a wo!an, and you wi$$ intuiti-e$y "ee$ what you are in essence, !ascu$ine or "e!inine. /he de-e$o)!ent wi$$ #ring you to )er"ection as a !an or as a wo!an. /hose who ha-e to go through co!)ensatory incarnations in which they are not #orn according to their origina$ se,ua$ identity can #eco!e aware o" this through !editation. <" course, e,)erience has to #e gathered, #ut not so that the )er"ect !ascu$ine #eing !ust #eco!e "e!inine or -ice -ersa. /o #e$ie-e this is hu!an error. 0ust as God is )er"ect in 'isC'er !ascu$ine and "e!inine as)ects, each one as such, without ha-ing to a$ternate the!, each creating har!onious$y in its own !ode and "unction, so it is with a$$ other #eings. 'ar!ony and e,)erience !ust #e gathered and rea$i5ed during the course o" de-e$o)!ent to regain di-ine )er"ection. :;81/I<N3 ?oes the se)aration #etween the "e!inine and the !ascu$ine continue a$$ through the incarnationa$ cyc$e9 ?oes the androgynous union ha))en on$y in the s)irit wor$d9 AN1+8=3 ;nion !ust ha))en in the s)irit wor$d. :;81/I<N3 ?oes it ha))en on$y when one does not ha-e to incarnate any!ore9 AN1+8=3 <n$y then. As $ong as incarnations are necessary, the uni"ication in the "or! o" s)iritua$ !erging cannot take )$ace. :;81/I<N3 2ay I ask a -ery occu$t 4uestion9 It has )reoccu)ied !e "or $ong. D(es.E ?oes it connect to the re"usa$ o" the 2aka!a that the s)$it was !ade in the conste$$ation o" the 8ag$e9 AN1+8=3 /here is a si!u$taneity. 'ints ha-e #een gi-en continuous$y in the entire @reation. :;81/I<N3 (ou ha-e e,)$ained to us that our rea$ity is on$y a !irror o" the true rea$ity. I cannot understand this. +hen we touch a tree, "or e,a!)$e, the #ark is so rea$ to us. 1o!ehow I cannot gras) what you !ean. I a! not 4uite there yet. AN1+8=3 Perha)s you and your "riends cou$d ta$k a#out it a"ter the session and that !ay he$) you to co!e c$oser to understanding it. It is &ust as di""icu$t to c$ari"y this as to understand it. And i" you cannot gras) it today, that does not !atter. Later6!ay#e in one or two or "i-e years6sudden$y a $ight wi$$ #e shed on the )ro#$e!. (ou wi$$ ha-e an ink$ing, a sense o" what it !eans. And #eyond that no one can go. /hen these words wi$$ a""ect you in a -ery di""erent way. @ertain$y, what you touch is rea$ or see!s to you rea$. +hen you touch a !irror, that is a$so rea$. (ou "ee$ the !irror. Let us assu!e you do not know that the $i-ing #eing re"$ected in the !irror is war! and #$ood "$ows in its -eins and thus you do not know how that #eing is "actua$$y e,)erienced in touch. (ou cou$d then !istake the !irror i!age "or the rea$ )erson. I!agine the re$ationshi) #etween the two rea$ities so!ewhat $ike this. (ou do not know how anything in the rea$ity o" which you are not conscious "ee$s to the touch, $ooks to the eye, and sounds to the ear. >or you, the u$ti!ate criterion is in touching, hearing, or seeing, #ecause you ha-e no #asis o" co!)arison and $ack higher s)iritua$ )erce)tion. :;81/I<N3 +hen a )erson is incarnated as a "e!a$e, #ut "ee$s herse$" !ore !ascu$ine, is it a sin against the incarnation or is it )erha)s an indication o" what you ha-e e,)$ained ear$ier9 AN1+8=3 I wou$d not say sin. +hen a wo!an re#e$s against her "e!ininity it is a de-iation, i" on$y on the e!otiona$ $e-e$. In this re#e$$ion is contained a re#e$$ion against God, against creation, against her destiny. And this is a$ways a sign that there is so!ething unhea$thy in the sou$. 8-entua$$y this !ust #e hea$ed. 8-eryone can "ind )er"ect ha))iness on$y #y "u$$y acce)ting and saying yes to the $i"e gi-en in an incarnation and #y "u$"i$$ing whate-er )ur)ose the incarnation is su))osed to ser-e. /he "irst ste) has to #e to "ind ones ca$$ing, to know ones task, and this can #e -ery easi$y disco-ered on this )ath. A )erson who does not "o$$ow his or her destiny wi$$ a$ways #e inward$y unha))y, )$agued #y )ro#$e!s, and "ee$ un"u$"i$$ed e-en when success"u$ and doing so!e good. ;n"ortunate$y, )eo)$e do not draw the right conc$usions "ro! their unha))iness, which actua$$y is a !essage o" their -ery own essence. /hey ascri#e their unha))iness to a$$ kinds o" e,terna$ circu!stances and con&ecture a#out e-ery kind o" )ossi#i$ity e,ce)t the !essage that co!es "ro! the dee)est )$ace in the!se$-es. +hen a )erson is unha))y she or he !ust know that so "ar she or he has not "u$"i$$ed her destiny to its "u$$ )otentia$. +hen )ro#$e!s e,ist, it does not !ake sense to so$e$y e$i!inate their outer !ani"estation* the root o" the )ro#$e! has to #e unearthed. <ne has to "ind to what e,tent one has "u$"i$$ed ones $i"e task and where one sti$$ $acks in this res)ect. /his is the on$y re!edy o" unha))iness and o" the gnawing discontent!ent with the se$". :;81/I<N3 'ow can one "u$"i$$ ones task to de-e$o) ones )ro)er !ascu$inity or "e!ininity when the s)$it we ha-e &ust discussed is not in #a$ance and there"ore )eo)$e ha-e to $i-e contrary to their #asic nature without ha-ing caused it or #eing a#$e to do anything a#out it9 /ake "or instance a wo!an who has so !uch !ascu$inity in her that she is una#$e to de-e$o) her "e!ininity, or on$y with great di""icu$ty. AN1+8=3 /his is a good 4uestion, #ut I wi$$ correct a !isunderstanding. /he assu!)tion that )eo)$e "ind the!se$-es in any situation without their "au$t is not true. /here is no such thing. /he s)$it ha))ened #ecause o" their own decision at the ti!e o" the >a$$, so "ar #ack that the e-eryday consciousness does not know it any!ore. /he s)irit re!e!#ers, a$though it does not a$$ow the !e!ory to reach the sur"ace. As "ar as your 4uestion is concerned I say this3 (ou know6and )sycho$ogy has recogni5ed this6 that there are in a$$ !en "e!inine e$e!ents and in a$$ wo!en !ascu$ine e$e!ents. /his e-en a))ears in astro$ogy, which our "riend here can #ear witness to. A !an can #e #orn under a "e!inine sign and yet #e an entire$y hea$thy !an* the sa!e ho$ds "or the wo!an who was #orn under a !ascu$ine sign. I" a !an is co!)$ete$y hea$thy and integrated6which !eans he is "u$"i$$ing his destiny #y carrying out his own de-e$o)!ent to its !a,i!u!6then the "e!inine tendencies that are in hi! wi$$ ne-er #e in the way o" the "u$$est un"o$ding o" his !ascu$ine identity, and -ice -ersa. Instead, the tendencies o" the other se, wi$$ "urther and co!)$ete the un"o$ding o" the )ersona$ity. >or e,a!)$e, when a !ascu$ine e$e!ent in a wo!an is trou#$ing and )ro#$e!atic, she does not $i-e in the "u$$est s)iritua$ sense. 7ut the sa!e e$e!ent wi$$ ha-e a su))orting in"$uence and e-en change into a )ositi-e, good 4ua$ity when the wo!an de-e$o)s herse$" s)iritua$$y. /he !ore this ha))ens, the !ore har!onious$y each sou$ current and tendency wi$$ !e$d and the who$e )ersona$ity wi$$ reach a higher degree o" integration. 'ere again e-erything de)ends so$e$y on the entitys "ree wi$$. It is not what one #rings into this $i"e or what one has ac4uired6ad-antages or disad-antages, )ositi-e or negati-e "actors $ooking at it "ro! the hu!an )oint o" -iew6that is decisi-e, #ut what one does with it. +hen you go on your s)iritua$ )ath in the !ost intensi-e way, then any distur#ing e$e!ent, #e it inner or outer, #eco!es an ad-antage. +hen you do not enter the s)iritua$ )ath, e-en an ad-antage !ust turn into a disad-antage and a )ro#$e!. In this case the !ascu$ine e$e!ents in the wo!an wi$$ act in contradiction, $eading to great inner con"$icts that wi$$ create dishar!ony. A$$ de)ends on how !uch one wi$$s ones own de-e$o)!ent. ?o you understand9 :;81/I<N8=3 Not entire$y. 7ut I wi$$ think a#out it. +hat we ha-e here is an ongoing )o$ari5ation, I #e$ie-e. AN1+8=3 (es, #ut there is !ore. :;81/I<N3 Is this a )rocess o" co!)$e!enting, o" #ringing together the o))osites9 AN1+8=3 0ust so. (ou know that each e$e!ent in the )rocess is neutra$ in itse$". +hen )ut into re$ationshi) it can act "a-ora#$y or un"a-ora#$y. It can #e "or!ed in this way or that way. It can #eco!e har!"u$ or #ene"icia$. +hen a !ascu$ine e$e!ent see!s to hinder a wo!an, her de-e$o)!ent $ies in )uri"ication, o-erco!ing, hea$ing, and integrating. /his change can on$y #e acco!)$ished through her de$i#erate decision to go this way. 1he has the choice to not do anything a#out it or to go the )ath o" )uri"ication. It was not #y accident that the s)$itting #eca!e so irregu$ar. It ha))ened due to the )ersons "ree wi$$ or, !ore )recise$y, the choice to go into a direction that see!ed !ost co!"orta#$e at the ti!e. /here"ore the de-e$o)!ent #ack to God !ust a$ways consist in con4uering the di""icu$ties one has origina$$y created. :;81/I<N3 ?oes this re"er to the )ro#$e! o" the career wo!an9 AN1+8=3 (es. :;81/I<N3 Is it at a$$ )ossi#$e that in the incarnation a technica$ error !ay occur9 AN1+8=3 No, no. /his is not )ossi#$e. :;81/I<N3 I ha-e !et )eo)$e who were entire$y "e!inine in the #est sense o" the word and yet $i-ed as !en. 2y 4uestion has nothing to do with ho!ose,ua$ity. I a! on$y interested in the s)iritua$ !eaning, not the )hysica$. AN1+8=3 1uch a case can #e the resu$t o" so!e kar!a which has nothing to do with the to)ic we are addressing, or i" it does, it is on$y an indirect connection. I" a )erson in an ear$ier incarnation has accu!u$ated !uch kar!a through o""ensi-e #eha-ior toward his or her own se,6and we wi$$ not go into detai$s6a wo!an !ust #e incarnated as a !an, and -ice -ersa. /hat has to #e endured. :;81/I<N8=3 /he )eo)$e I was re"erring to did not su""er at a$$, they were e-en -ery ha))y. AN1+8=3 >irst o" a$$, kar!a does not a$ways ha-e to do with su""ering. %ar!a is a$so the good* it !eans si!)$y cause and e""ect. 7ut in this case, it is not so. 8-en though you do not see the )ain or the )ro#$e! in it, #e$ie-e !e, this kind o" $i"e is not easy. :;81/I<N3 +hat then is the case with her!a)hrodites, where you can a$so distinguish #etween "e!inine and !ascu$ine ty)es. 1cienti"ic records, I #e$ie-e, indicate the e,istence o" on$y one )er"ect her!a)hrodite, who was ha$" !an and ha$" wo!an. 2ay#e e-en that )ro)ortion was not e,act$y )er"ect. AN1+8=3 (ou ha-e #rought u) a -ery interesting 4uestion that can )ro-ide a key. 1cience has a$ready "ound !uch that cou$d #e in"or!ati-e, i" on$y science wou$d connect the resu$ts with the #asic 4uestions o" @reation. /he reason why such a )ain"u$ incarnation !ust occur is a$ways kar!ic. Its e,act roots wou$d need a "ar.reaching e,)$anation which we cannot gi-e at this )oint. In ti!e, howe-er, you wi$$ )erha)s, through e,a!)$es and certain e,)$anations, #etter understand what circu!stances can cause such an incarnation to ha))en. 7ut there can #e no error. :;81/I<N3 Is there a#so$ute$y no error o" any kind in @reation9 Is there a hundred )ercent in"a$$i#i$ity9 AN1+8=3 A#so$ute$y. IN/8=08@/I<N3 /he reason "or each catastro)he is that again the $aw #e "u$"i$$ed. AN1+8=3 0ust so. In !ost cases, when hu!an theories a#out @reation di-erge and contradict each other, each o" the con"$icting theories can contain a kerne$ o" truth. /his a$so )ertains to the 4uestion whether incarnations occur a$ternating as !a$e and "e!a$e as against the su))osition that there are on$y !ascu$ine and "e!inine #eings and no changeo-er. /he sa!e is -a$id "or the hu!an inc$ination to worshi) God as a )erson as against e,)eriencing 'i! in disso$ution and "or!$essness. +e can notice again and again that when it co!es to two di""erent o)inions there is a$ways a core o" truth that under$ies the see!ing$y contradictory )ositions. As "ar as !ascu$ine and "e!inine incarnations go, you can co!e to rea$i5e that #oth are right. I" you !editate a#out it, !y "riend, and weigh e-erything you ha-e $earned and recogni5ed, and in addition think a#out the !any )ara$$e$s that )oint to this truth, you wi$$ co!e to see that it has to #e this way and cannot #e di""erent. +ords are, as usua$, inade4uate* it is hard to "orce the conce)ts into your $anguage, so in"inite$y hard. In order to understand what I a! rea$$y ta$king a#out, it is o" )ara!ount i!)ortance that you do not c$ing to the e,act denotation o" a word #ut take it in its $arger !eaning and connect your know$edge with your "ee$ing. /hen insight wi$$ grow in you, "or which no words can su#stitute. :;81/I<N3 Fery $itt$e has #een written a#out these things. +e !ust !ake our own recognitions with the he$) o" guidance. Isnt it so9 AN1+8=3 7ut in the -arious areas o" the hu!anities6and a$so e$sewhere6there are hints and )ara$$e$s which can #e connected to the )re-ai$ing )hi$oso)hies and a$so to the teachings gi-en here. <n$y when you #ring together know$edge and "ee$ing wi$$ you gain insights #y reading ins)ired $iterature and )hi$oso)hy. :;81/I<N3 I wou$d $ike to ask a "ina$ 4uestion re$ating to this to)ic. I ha-e co!e to the conc$usion that the continua$, s)iritua$ growth o" a #eing is not de)endent on whether the #ody is !a$e or "e!a$e. /he #asic )rinci)$e o" the !ascu$ine )ersists e-en when incarnated as a wo!an. /he te!)orary wo!anhood does not change the "act that he is a !an. /his is the essentia$ truth I #e$ie-e. AN1+8=3 (es, #ut it a$ways de)ends on what the hu!an #eings do with their $i-es and how they use the gi-en conditions6the di""icu$ties as we$$ as whate-er !akes their $i-es easier or !ore #eauti"u$. :;81/I<N3 Are there not two kinds o" !editation, the s)iritua$$y acti-e and another, !ore e!otiona$9 >or e,a!)$e, !editating on A7e sti$$ and know that I a! God,B without thinking, si!)$y a$$owing the eterna$ )rinci)$e o" God to )enetrate into the sou$9 Is that right9 AN1+8=3 :uite right. Again, there is a )ara$$e$ to what we ta$ked a#out #e"ore. 8-en in the "or! o" !editation we "ind the !ascu$ine and the "e!inine )rinci)$es. /he one is inte$$ectua$$y acti-e and in-o$-ed with thought, there"ore !ascu$ine* the other is e!otiona$ and "$owing, there"ore "e!inine. 7oth o" the! are i!)ortant. In a )articu$ar de-e$o)!enta$ )hase one o" the! can #e e!)hasi5ed and in the ne,t one the other, unti$ #a$ancing and "usion can take )$ace e-en in this. /he kind o" !editation that shou$d #e !ost$y cu$ti-ated is a$ways the one which you "ind !ore di""icu$t, #ecause this indicates that the 4ua$ity to #e cu$ti-ated is $acking "or the u$ti!ate !erging. :;81/I<N3 I heard that according to so!e 8astern teachings a )erson can incarnate again into a )ast $i"eti!e. Is this correct9 AN1+8=3 No, this is not correct. :;81/I<N3 /he !eta)hysica$ #ent within a )erson is Gods gi"t, #ecause through it he or she has the o))ortunity to get c$oser to God, )ro-ided the 4uest is di$igent$y )ursued. ?o the )eo)$e who are chosen to ha-e such a dis)osition earn it in an ear$ier incarnation or are they gi-en this ad-antage as a test9 And i" they wi$$ not use the ta$ent, it wi$$ not #e gi-en to the! in the ne,t incarnation9 AN1+8=3 'ere are two 4uestions co!#ined into one and I wi$$ answer the! in turn. As to the "irst )art o" your 4uestion3 7oth situations occur. +hen so!eone has worked and "ought "or the !eta)hysica$ connection, he or she wi$$ #ring the "ruits into the ne,t $i"eti!e. (ou can a$so notice this in )eo)$es astro$ogica$ charts. /he ta$ent can o)en u) easi$y in one case, whi$e another )erson has to strugg$e to ac4uire it. I" he or she does that, then )erha)s in the ne,t $i"e e-erything wi$$ o)en u) without any di""icu$ty. /here are a$so cases where the !eta)hysica$ #ent is used as a test, where an e,)erience o" !eta)hysica$ rea$ity is o""ered with the )ur)ose to "urther an acce$erated de-e$o)!ent. /his !ight ha))en in the "o$$owing way3 1o!eone !ay ha-e earned certain !erits in a $i"eti!e which !ay not necessari$y #e connected with a gi"t "or s)iritua$ity. As this entity enters the s)irit wor$d, the !erits earned wi$$ work the!se$-es out e,act$y according to $aw. +hen the ne,t incarnation is discussed6 e-ery incarnation is care"u$$y )$anned, and o"ten, es)ecia$$y "ro! a certain stage on, the indi-idua$ #eing can )artici)ate in the )$anning6the decision o" how to en&oy the "ruits o" the !erits o" the )ast $i"eti!e in the ne,t incarnation is entrusted to the indi-idua$. A$though the )articu$ar #eing !ay not ha-e earned #y his or her own $a#or the grace o" a s)iritua$ o)ening, he or she can desire a !eta)hysica$ e,)erience to take )$ace in the ne,t $i"e on the #asis o" )ast !erits. +hen the desire has a )ositi-e resu$t and creates the a#i$ity to e,)erience s)iritua$$y, the e,)erience does not ha-e to co!e through a success"u$ strugg$e to o)en u) the s)iritua$ contact. As one )erson can wish "or good hea$th and another "or )ros)erity, so can yet another wish "or an o))ortunity "or ra)id s)iritua$ ad-ance!ent, ha-ing a$ready co!e to understand that the te!)orary co!"orts o" earth $i"e !atter $itt$e in co!)arison with the ha))iness o" s)iritua$ ascent. /hus, the #eings who !ake the decisions "or the ne,t incarnation wou$d say, A+e cannot gi-e you e""ort$ess un"o$ding o" the s)irit. <n the #asis o" your !erits, howe-er, we can he$) you so that in your ne,t $i"e you can e,ercise your "ree wi$$ to sei5e the o))ortunities o""ered to you in this direction. /he decision !ust #e !ade #y you, the strugg$e !ust #e won #y you, so that you can co!e to the #$iss o" s)iritua$ $i#eration.B /his, then, is di""erent "ro! the "irst case. And now to the second )art o" your 4uestion. <" course it is so. +hen a hu!an #eing has the o))ortunity to go on this )ath and does not take ad-antage o" it, then the door to the s)iritua$ e,)erience wi$$ ha-e to #e shut "or 4uite a $ong ti!e. I do not ha-e to con"ir! this. I" you think a#out it, you wi$$ rea$i5e that it cannot #e any other way. /he )erson does not take ad-antage o" the )ossi#i$ities to reach this wonder"u$ goa$, "or whate-er reasons6$a5iness, $o-e o" co!"ort, -anity, or sha!e6a$$ o" which !ake hi! or her "ee$ that it is i!)ossi#$e to o)en u). +hen that is the case, a )ersona$ "au$t is a$ways res)onsi#$e, howe-er great the se$".dece)tion. >au$ts need to #e o-erco!e, es)ecia$$y those that #o$t the door to the s)iritua$ )ath. /his !ust ha-e its conse4uences. 1uch a )erson wi$$ ha-e to "ight harder "or a s)iritua$ o)ening* the o-erco!ing wi$$ )ro-e to #e !ore di""icu$t and in no way di!inished "or the de$ay. It is, howe-er, on$y a de$ay. /he e,)erience o" the s)irit cannot #e u$ti!ate$y )re-ented. (es, !y dear ones, I know you do not $ike to hear this. No#ody $ikes to hear it who has not a$ready "ought through a $arge )art o" the way. (et, this is the way it is. And I te$$ you, -eri$y, it is not un&ust. /he greatest and highest ha))iness that a hu!an #eing can attain6his or her own de-e$o)!ent6 !ust #e "ought "or. And i" you are he$)ed to the e,tent o" #eing guided, and you sti$$ dont do your #est, then6you ha-e to ad!it6cause and e""ect !ust work according$y, and it is &ust and right to #e so. :;81/I<N3 In connection with the "e!inine and !ascu$ine )rinci)$es, is it true that e-en historica$ e)ochs can #e "e!inine or !ascu$ine9 AN1+8=3 (es, that is true. 1uch in"$uences !ani"est in di""erent )eriods. @ertain s)iritua$ #eings work es)ecia$$y strong$y in this res)ect. A$so, such cyc$es are go-erned #y s)iritua$ $aw #ecause it is "or the good o" the de-e$o)!ent o" hu!anity. :;81/I<N3 Is it true, "or e,a!)$e, that the twentieth century #rings the "e!inine e$e!ent !ore into the "oreground9 AN1+8=3 (es, it is -ery true. /his a$so ser-es the necessary !o-e!ent o" e4ua$i5ation. :;81/I<N3 /odays $ecture is -ery c$ose to !y heart. And you see! to ha-e di""icu$ties to !ani"est through the !ediu!. +hy is this so9 AN1+8=3 /he di""icu$ties do not $ie in the !eaning o" !y words* they are co!ing through to a certain degree. (ou )ercei-e )erha)s !ore o" a )ro#$e! than there is. I a! a#$e to get through. <" course, we dea$ with such di""icu$t conce)ts that it is not so easy to )enetrate the !ediu!. A$$ this is strange to her, causing, o" course, o#stac$es which I ha-e to circu!-ent. :;81/I<N3 +hen a )erson dies and the s)irit reenters the s)heres o" the #eyond, is this entry a$ways acco!)anied #y )ain9 AN1+8=3 No. :;81/I<N3 (ou !ean not necessari$y9 AN1+8=3 No, not at a$$. /here are !any instances where this is a#so$ute$y not the case. :;81/I<N3 Is a )ain$ess return a grace that one has !erited9 AN1+8=3 I wou$d descri#e it as cause and e""ect6or as grace. It can #e #oth, it can #e a !erit that co!es to "ruition in this way. <r it can #e the e""ect o" a se$".created cause through a )articu$ar way o" $i"e. :;81/I<N3 +hen one has sinned and sincere$y re)ents in ones heart and then tries to !ake restitution and #etter onese$", does one sti$$ ha-e to acce)t the conse4uences9 AN1+8=3 No. +hen one tru$y re)ents and #y this de-e$o)!ent o-erco!es the "au$t that caused the sin, the sin is e,tinguished. 8-ery kar!a can #e erased. And this is e-en !ore a))$ica#$e to so!ething you ha-e caused in this $i"e. And now, !y dear ones, I withdraw, gi-ing Gods #$essings to each one o" you. 2ay 'is $o-e strengthen you, o)en you u), and guide you to s)iritua$ growth, so that you wi$$ #e e-er !ore ha))y chi$dren o" God.