The fixed point and the movement are, in the cosmic sense, more than that which we in everyday speech understand by these two concepts. Here movement is not only understood as the movement of an object or body in space at a greater or lesser speed. Objects and bodies that, when seen with our physical eyes, are standing still are from the cosmic point of view also expressions of movement. Indeed, we "see" that also that which is "standing still" and everything that is accessible to sensory perception is – in a cosmic perspective – movement. Sensory perception cannot take place at all without being a reaction between at least two forms of movement. These reactions are what we call the experience of life. When we say that something is warm or that something is cold, this warmth and this coldness constitute in essence merely reactions between various forms of movement or releases of energy. If we are bathing in water the temperature of which is below the temperature of our skin we will feel it as cold, whereas we will feel it as warm if the temperature is above that of our skin. These sensations of coldness and warmth are reactions between the temperature of our skin and the temperature of the water, or between two forms of movement. If one dips one's hand into water that measures 20 degrees immediately after one has it in water that measures 30 degrees, it becomes evident that one feels the 20 degrees as cold, whereas on the contrary one feels the 20 degrees as warm if one beforehand one had one's hand in water that was 10 degrees. In this instance we understand that our perception is relative. But this does not apply only in this and similar situations. Our perception of our environment as a whole and our view of other living beings is based on a relationship of relativity, that is to say a relationship between the expression of energy of the surroundings and the combination of energy that there is at this moment in our own consciousness and organism.

Our view of our neighbour will therefore, already in advance, be dependent on our outlook. This outlook that we have in advance can be sympathetic, but it can also be such that one feels extremely repulsed by the being in question. This is the "thermometer" with which we measure our fellow beings' "temperature" or spiritual condition. When two human beings' view of a third human being is widely different it is because each of them experiences him or her through their own combination of energies of consciousness, and each of them believes that their own view of the person in question is the right one. We can use the afore-mentioned example of the temperature of the water as a symbol. If two human beings each put a hand in water measuring 20 degrees and one of them had previously had their hand in water measuring 10 degrees and the other in water measuring 30 degrees, one person would think that the water is warm, while the other would think the water is cold. If they had enough temperament, they would perhaps begin to quarrel and call each other liars because they have each experienced the water as being respectively warm or cold. They do not think that their experience was based on their specific "temperature" before the experience. Relatively speaking, each of them is right on the basis of their individual prior conditions, but cosmically speaking neither of them is right. The truth can be found only by taking into account the overall view that knows each person's "temperature" in relation to the common experience.

Terrestrial human beings' daily existence is almost exclusively based on illusory opinions. If this were not the case, there would not arise all the conflicts that characterise life on Earth. Everyone would be in agreement, and the creation of the United Nations and a world seat of government would therefore be an extremely easy matter – quite apart from the fact that there would be no need for it at all. If all human beings had the possibility of arriving at the same analysis of the same being and did not have their own individual analyses and views, there would be absolutely nothing to disagree about. But is there then a truly objective, universal truth? There is such a truth, and it can be experienced through cosmic clear sight.

The relative point of view is exclusively a reaction between one individual's temporary mental attitude, or lack of cosmic knowledge, and the display of energy of the surroundings, which also includes the neighbour's behaviour towards this individual. But cosmic clear sight differs from the relative point of view in that it is not based on personal sympathy or antipathy or the neighbour's behaviour towards the individual itself, but is, on the contrary, based on an overall view of this neighbour's place in the cosmos and thereby on this being's mission within the universal whole. As the being that possesses cosmic clear sight sees that this neighbour's place in existence within the divine world plan is a one hundred percent useful and indispensable link in the Godhead's transformation of human beings from animal to human being, he cannot on the basis of this cosmic clear sight say anything other than "Not my, but thy will be done". And it is natural for him to do this, even though the neighbour's view of him and conduct towards him is perhaps extremely unpleasant. He forgives his neighbour since he knows that, on the evolutionary step on which he finds himself, "he knows not what he does".

But how can one know that this assessment is not false? How can one know that there is a God at all? Many people think that since the world is as it is at the moment this is proof that there is no God, and that everything is pure chance. But the human being who gives expression to such a view of life gives no thought to the fact that it absolutely does not live in accordance with its pronouncements. On the contrary, they do everything they can to make use of the experiences they have gathered and to think logically in order to deduce from the things and circumstances what they themselves think is the most possible. That they do not always succeed is another matter, but they keep on trying and the fact that they try to keep a "firm hold on things", as we say, is proof that all things are not chance movements, but are, on the contrary, movements that are purposefully combined on the basis of a greater or lesser overall view of the things. The more experiences the beings have, the greater the overall view they will have of the connection between cause and effect. But what is it that has the overall view and that gathers the experiences? What is it that experiences the relationship of certain movements to other movements and that sets new movements in motion? Is it something that is in itself also movement?

Every human being feels this fixed point as being the sensation of a centre. It feels that it is the centre of the whole world. We use the word "I" to express the sensation of this fixed point. Only the I in the living being can experience the movement. But how do the movements come about? We know that some movements are created by the living beings or I's that make up our surroundings. It is an important part of our experience of life to experience what other human beings say and do and that we can be more or less content with. We ourselves also create something that is a greater or lesser joy to our surroundings. A large part of the movements that we experience is creation or manifestation that is to a greater or lesser extent based on logical thinking and humanity from the I's of the living beings. But there are also movements that we do not know the origin of. All the releases of energy in Nature, from the cycles in the universe or the macrocosmic movements, to the movements in substance or matter, that is to say the in the worlds of the cells, atoms and electrons, the microcosmic movements, are they pure chance? Or is there also behind them a "fixed point", a "creator" or an "I"? Can we not see that behind all Nature's movements or manifestations, from the greatest to the least we can perceive, that there is logic? How have human beings learned to think logically, or at any rate have made the first attempts in that direction? Nature is human beings' great teacher. By gradually getting to know the laws of Nature, human beings themselves have become capable of trying to get started with logical creation. But once we know that behind everything that human beings create there is an originator, a thinking "something" that is itself above the movements and that can set movements in motion and experience them, and as movements cannot come about by themselves, there must also be, behind all the logical display of energy that there is in Nature or the universe, a "fixed point", an "I" or a "creator" whose creative ability lies far above the creative ability of the human being's I or the purely terrestrial human manifestations.

The I behind Nature, which means the I of the Godhead, and the I in us must therefore be the absolute fixed points in existence. And since the I is not movement it is not, like all movement, subject to the concepts beginning and ending. It can be only eternal, in fact it is eternity itself. One can therefore speak about the "eternal Father" and the "eternal son of God", and these eternal sons of God are all living beings. Their "beginnings" and "endings" within that part of themselves that belongs to the world of movements and cycles, that is to say their organisms, is something that their eternal I with its eternal creative ability has manifested. They are movements that the I has set in motion and through which it experiences life. The I creates mental bodies and for periods of time also physical bodies. Even though a physical organism, which is merely a combination of energy or movement, "dies", the I continues to experience life, only not through the physical body, and it has the ability, after a period of time, to once again create a physical organism and through that to continue to experience its fate, or the process by which it has to reap what it has sown.