QUESTION: (Alex) I don't understand the saying in the Bible about turning the other cheek when you are slapped.
ANSWER: It really has the same meaning as "do not resist evil." Again, I want to emphasize not to confuse this with passive endurance when it may be appropriate to stand up and fight for what is right. Turn the other cheek merely means to use your powers of differentiation so as to judge when fighting back may be the perpetuation of aggression and further involvement into evil with no purpose and no chance of dissolving the negative interaction. Perhaps we can say that positive assertion can happen fruitfully only when you are truly filled with one single motive: to further the will of God; to express the Christ in you; to expose yourself; and to stand up for the truth without personal gain in any way or on any level. When you fight, then you must fight for -- for the truth, for justice, for a good cause -- rather than against -- for example, against someone who has angered you. When you are motivated by the cause of God rather than by your selfwill and your pride, then you will feel strong and secure, and therefore not inhibited by guilt.
QUESTION: (Eva) Science claims that the computer is the next stage in evolution. I recently heard a panel of scientists discussing that the growth of the human brain has stopped and is therefore projected outwardly by creating a new kind of genius. The genius, knowledge, learning, and experience of several people can be combined into one computer and thereby make the knowledge of the computer infinitely superior to the best brain. The scientists went on to explain that in some strange way the computer becomes eventually endowed with a will of its own. Various ramifications were discussed about this possibility, that now seems more than a mere possibility. My question is: how does this trend connect with spiritual evolution as you talk about it in your lectures and teachings?
ANSWER: Let us first discuss how this trend came about. For many millennia the human brain played the smallest part in man's attempt to survive. He was mainly driven by and motivated by instinctual forces. Only fairly recently has the brain been brought into the foreground and has created the civilizations and the cultures that followed primitive man. In recent times the over-emphasis on the brain, as if it were the only important and valid organ of man, has created an absurdity, and that is the robot-man. The robot-man is indeed the outpicturing of the intellect brought to an absurdity. This absurdity, which is a sad caricature of man at best and a danger at worst, can help man to wake up and to take further genuine steps in his evolution: first to find and then to develop his faculties beyond the intellect and also beyond the primitive instincts. For the most part, these faculties are now all involuntary. They are the divine will, the divine inner voice, the feeling of love, the vision of cosmic truth, the feeling of serving a larger purpose. When man seeks these new faculties and he devotes his efforts to uncovering and contacting these aspects hidden deep within himself, then they will become directly accessible to him, and hence voluntary. Just as in any scientific experiment, man must start with an entirely open mind. It is a willingness to investigate, and to spend time, energy, and effort even if results remain elusive for a long time. Man has this desirable, open, and seeking attitude in many respects already, but he still channels his entire effort into the areas of intellect and outer mechanical manifestations. If man chooses to direct the same open attitude and the same concerted effort to exploring his own inner world, then a new man will indeed emerge. The new man does not need a larger cortex. The cortex he has is sufficiently large and harmonious and has divine-like existence. But what is not yet sufficiently developed, and therefore requires all of man's attention in the times to come, are the inner faculties I mentioned before. There exist realms of consciousness that so far are unrecognized by science and by the general public. Evolution must continue in that direction.
QUESTION: (Blythe Patel) I want to understand and feel more deeply what it really means to surrender. What is the nature of surrender? Is it possible for the "I" to surrender at all or is it an attitude or a quality as if the ego is silenced and just the Being becomes receptive? And I do not really know who God is and therefore how can I ask for guidance in the direction of surrender? To whom? To what? Is just the very attitude of surrender enough? And can I surrender to a concept, to an idea of what I think God might be, or must I not experience God initially before moving toward surrender? Saying "I surrender totally to the will of God" feels like a tremendous statement implying an impossible death of the ego. Am I incorrect in this thinking?
ANSWER: Surrender means giving over. It means giving in and flowing with what is beyond personal ego control. The basic surrender must always be to God, to the Christ Who is the most humanized aspect of God, and therefore nearest to His human children. If surrender to God is the primary attitude, then true strength and true integrity either must be released or will be restored, contrary to the common misunderstanding which believes exactly the opposite. I explained this at length in the last lecture. If surrender to God, which is a natural movement, is denied by the personality, then a false surrender may ensue -- to false gods. In other words, to substitute powers. As a result, justified fears will further deny, and hence displace, the real surrender to God.
QUESTION: (Joan Watkins) In respect to the attendance to the Guide lectures and the Q & As, why is there so much resistance to keeping the regulations, such as paying admission and making sure your name is marked, and how does this reistance affect the Path as an entity?
ANSWER: This resistance reflects the most childish and destructive attitude in the individuals who act this way, or who perhaps feel this way without necessarily acting it out. It reflects the child, who considers the authorities of this Path enemies who exploit him or her. This vague feeling, that is rarely made articulate and clear in the consciousness, exists as a projection of exactly that intent on the part of the person. The individual wants an all-giving parental figure who makes no demands and who gives all. When such a parental figure fails to materialize, then resentments, hostility, and rage ensue.