Male and Female Incarnations: Their

Rhythms and Causes

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.