Now, most people will undoubtedly assert that they have never been instrumental in killing other human beings, and hence they cannot be murderers. But the mere fact that one has never actually and literally killed another human being is no proof that one is not a murderer. All "unfinished" human beings are murderers. And this must be so. This does not imply, of course, that all "unfinished" human beings are murderers in the sense that they have killed another human being. This form of obeying the fifth commandment is in reality only the first and easiest way of doing so. No, the fifth commandment is related to numberless other ways, where it is very difficult for the unfinished human being not to infringe this divine commandment. Said commandment is a definite prohibition of anything murderous or life-destroying in the human manifestation of will or attitude towards other living beings. And here, as mentioned above, there are numberless actions which are in themselves both murderous and vitally destructive, without directly involving the actual killing or murder of the human being against whom they are directed. Life is a far bigger and more comprehensive process than what happens openly and can be directly apprehended by the physical senses. Man has more functions than those of his digestion, heart, kidneys, liver and lungs, or those of his five senses, sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch. These experiences or functions of the senses are merely coarse physical functions, i.e. reactions of energy, which would be of no importance at all if behind them there were not other functions by the help of which man can translate these physical vibrations into mental experiences, which again, are the same as what we call "thoughts". Thoughts again, are the material which constitutes consciousness. Consciousness is thus the same as the sum total of the thought-materials - memories of experiences - accumulated in the individual in question, as well as the ability out of these materials to create reactions in visible matter, resulting again in experiences and thoughts in other beings. It is this transformation of physical reactions into consciousness that we call "thinking". And the transformation of thoughts into physical reactions is what we call "manifestation".

Life consists, therefore, of an "experience" of reactions, and of a "creation" of reactions. This creation of a reaction is thus again the same as the mode of behaviour of the individual in question. In this manner his mode of behaviour will become the same as his manifestation or the revealing to other beings of his existence i.e. his inner mental, vital functions – his thoughts, his knowledge, desires and will All this will thus be apparent in his mode of behaviour, and will be judged as his standard of morals or lack of same, as his knowledge or ignorance, etc. This inner, vital function reflects itself in his spirit, his mentality and his conception of life. This conception of life has been formed through the experiences (pleasant or unpleasant) he has met in his daily life. In unfinished man this conception of life is neither permanent nor stable. Unfinished man is simply a being, whose conception of life has not yet attained the perfect stage. It has not developed far enough to be based upon the mode of behaviour fulfilling the true Law of Life: "To be a joy or a blessing to everything alive", and thus to appear in "God's Image". Unfinished man is a being who differs, more or less, from the final, perfect stage, and is therefore proportionately not exactly "a joy or a blessing" to those around him. But, as he gradually develops through life's exterior physical reactions, his opinions find conception of life slowly change. What he first considered excellent morals, in every way only just and right, will then sometimes appear glaringly immoral later on and thus seem obviously a wrong mode of behaviour. The new view, therefore, will make him change his mode of behaviour. It is this "change of behaviour" that we call "evolution". We now see that all human beings stand at various' levels in this change of behaviour. And that is why some people to-day still adhere to a mode of behaviour that we ourselves have long ago discarded as immoral or unjust, while similarly other people again have long ago discarded the morals and behaviour that we (if we happen to be still at an unfinished stage) consider the only right kind of life and of morals and behaviour.

Thus we all stand on various steps in evolution. What seems morally right and just to one person may well he considered immoral and unjust by another. And that is why all unfinished human beings cannot help being more or less at loggerheads with one another, conformably as they happen to differ from each other in development, and have thus acquired different conceptions of life. They have, of course, not all acquired the same experience in given fields and cannot therefore apprehend said fields in the same way. Everyone will uphold his point of view as the only right and proper one. And in this way all unfinished human beings are predestined to quarrel with everyone else. And isn't this exactly what is happening everywhere in the world to-day?

But to be "at war" with other people is most unpleasant, and therefore man tries to fight against these warlike tendencies. But as in reality the true cause of this is not yet understood, man does not know how to master it. In worst case he can as yet think of no better way than to kill his adversary, that is to say the being who, because it represents a different stage of development from that he himself occupies, is obliged by nature to apprehend its conception of life as quite as just and right as his own. To kill another being because it tries to uphold its conception of life, only makes it equally right and just that he himself be killed for wishing to maintain his own conception of life as the one and only right one, quite apart from the folly of murdering another being, because It belongs to another step in evolution, and has thus just as much right to live at its level as he has to live on his. The reason for the many varying conceptions of life is then not an act of will, but is a question of the degree of development of the beings in question. This is as natural a phenomenon as the difference between rain and sunshine, or between day and night. To kill someone because he is at a higher or lower stage of development is in itself just, as foolish and mistaken an act as it would be foolish to kill him because he had blue eyes, light hair or was so and so tall.

Yet nevertheless it is almost a general rule that people murder each other more or less or less because of the fact that they are not on the same step in evolution. The conflict can but arise from the differing views held by the opposing parties. And differing views can only arise from differing experiences, and thus from different stages of development. There is thus not one single quarrel that is not in its origin due to the fact that in certain fields the opposing parties are at different stages of development. It is this fact that is the cause of all wars between nations as well as between individuals. Mankind's way of fighting against this war is therefore foredoomed to failure.

One cannot abolish evolution, which after all is the real cause of the differences between people and nations. The main object of war is to regiment the opponents. But how can beings at totally different stages of development be regimented? A primitive native from the African Jungle cannot be turned into a highly cultivated, civilized being by issuing a decree accompanied by threats of torture, capital punishment, prison or incarceration if its tenets are not adhered to. Hence dictatorships and war are a hopeless means of establishing real peace. People can murder the bodies of their fellow human beings, but said beings will ever be born, again and again. Enemy will meet enemy as long as there is room for enmity in their hearts and minds. The man who will exterminate all human beings in opposition to his ideas will be always at war. War is a natural result of his stage of development. And, whatever he does, he will never come to represent any other and more perfect stage of development by any other means than by acquiring the principles and mode of behaviour of the stage in question.

It is therefore understandable that beings on a higher level of development are eager to lead those on a lower level to understand the terrible mistake they are making, and to know the utter folly of trying to settle differences by enmity, brutality, violence or force, or by murder and killings. And it was in an attempt to help mankind to abolish war and enmity that the great commandment: "Thou Shalt Not Kill" was given and, through the other nine Biblical commands, to enumerate the many dangerous variations by which this command might be violated.

To kill is thus the same as to destroy the experience of life of other living beings. If something unfavourable is said to a friend about somebody else, and the aspersion leads to your friend's disliking the person maligned, the slanderous opinion has killed something in the normal function of that friend's life, in that it has persuaded him to think evil of the person in question. Evil thoughts are poison to the physical blood, and are thus injurious to health. And if the libel reaches the ears of the person slandered it will (if the person in question is still at an unfinished stage) invariably rob him of some of his normal enjoyment of life. Quite possibly it will make him feel more or less downhearted and depressed, entailing a reduced enjoyment of life, and hence a loss of life's normal experiences. But reducing the normal experience of life is proportionately the same as killing said person's experience of life.

Man has indeed progressed far as regards refraining from killing and murdering the bodies of his fellow-men, except in the carnage of war. But in any situation where he harbours rancour or wrathfulness with his neighbour, and persecutes him with slander or other forms of soul-destroying annoyances and embarrassments, he is killing his neighbour's normal experience of life, leading him into a quagmire of dejection and disgust of life, which may sometimes even turn into insanity and suicide. The only cases in our behaviour in which we do not kill and murder are those, and only those, in which we understand our neighbour and forgive him - or in such situations where we disarm all enmity by friendship. By adhering to this attitude in our daily behaviour we have not only not killed anything, but have actually radiated light and warmth into our neighbour's gloomy mental outlook. And thus we understand how Christ, hanging upon the cross, was able to pray for his executioners: "Forgive them, Farther, for they know not what they do". He knew that what they did was the outcome of the level in evolution on which they stood. If they had been on a higher level they would have understood what it was they were doing, and they would never have lent themselves to crucifying a human being. We also understand why He tells us to forgive not merely seven times a day, but on the contrary, as many as seventy times seven! And moreover we understand why one should love one's neighbour as oneself. For he who loves his neighbour as himself would never have the heart to treat him in any other way than he would have the heart to treat himself.

The principle of killing applies therefore not merely to the killing of human and animal organisms, i.e. their physical bodies, it applies equally much or more to the mental field. Any situation involving just one single unkind word comes under the principle of killing seen from a cosmic point of view. Love is therefore the only way out of the zones of darkness and war. Except through love it will never be possible for us to live in harmony with life and to be at one with our neighbour. And without this harmony there can never be any question of immunity from unhappy conditions in our own fate.