Next we have the sixth thought-concentration in the Lord's Prayer, which is expressed as follows: "Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us". To the modern spiritual scientist these words may perhaps sound a little superfluous or meaningless. As the study of the divine world plan or life shows us that "everything is very good" and that no one can in fact suffer wrong or do wrong, then no one can get into a situation in which there is any question of guilt, which means a feeling of "sin" or "wrong" which has been committed against anyone and for which one, in the absolute sense, has the duty to pray to be forgiven. However, as it is a cosmic being who recommends this thought-concentration as a part of the suppliant's prayer, there will be no logical reason to suppose these words to be an illusion or a product of superstition. Consequently there must be a perfectly logical reason for the recommendation of the presence of this prayer in the Lord's Prayer. What cosmic truth or absolute reality may then be concealed in this apparently misleading external verbal form? Well, is it not true that this prayer is meant to remedy a "guilty conscience"? Is not such a "guilty conscience" in its worst form one of the greatest mental sufferings which can befall terrestrial Man? Is it not just this which in the form of "bad conscience" tortures the dying Man on his deathbed, gives him an agonizing death and creates "purgatory" for the same being after death? Does not the same "bad conscience" create an unhappy condition in many other fields of life, such as marriage, friendship, relation to superiors, subordinates and equals? In short, does it not destroy all the individual's otherwise happy and harmonious relationship with his neighbour, if it does not find vent in the shape of a sense of guilt and prayer for forgiveness from the person concerned? Does the modern spiritual scientist represent an exception to this? Can he possibly with his high theoretical knowledge completely immunize himself against or be mentally indifferent to any serious inconvenience or discomfort he may have inflicted upon his neighbour? Can he superciliously calm himself by the thought that this event, inconvenience or discomfort was this neighbour's "own fate", which means it was an effect of which the same neighbour himself was the original provoking first cause and he therefore on his part cannot have any claim on anything like an apology? If so, spiritual science has not yet become a serious problem to this spiritual scientist, but it constitutes nothing but a pleasant diversion on the line of a theoretical hobby-horse through which he tries to explain away to himself and others his still prominent and great lack of neighbourly love. The lack of neighbourly love revealed through such an attitude to wrong actions towards his neighbour reveals the primitivism of its originator as belonging to stages of development which are far below the stage of the ordinary noble believer and unbeliever. Would not any of these beings be more or less unhappy in any situation in which they happened to inflict a great disaster or suffering upon another being? Would it make any difference whatsoever that they had certainly not deliberately inflicted this inconvenience upon their neighbour but had happened to do so quite unintentionally? Do we not see instances of how motorists or drivers of other vehicles have actually had mental breakdowns in situations in which they have happened to mutilate or kill other people with their vehicles although the responsibility for the accident quite obviously was one hundred per cent on the side of the victims? – No, do not think that the sixth thought-concentration in the Lord's Prayer becomes superfluous so easily. Thus we realize that even in situations in which the person concerned, objectively, is completely without guilt, this is not sufficient to prevent the sympathetic or loving person from having a more or less serious mental crisis or grief that he has happened to be the provoking tool inflicting the accident on his neighbour.
      But as this obvious innocence cannot quite calm even the less loving being, how do you think that the experience of obvious innocence would calm the being whose love for his neighbour is much more conspicuous?
      The fact is that the problem in its deepest cosmic analysis is in reality not a question about guilt or innocence but about a contact with the general condition of one's own self or standard of neighbourly love. This standard constitutes the sphere of what one has the heart to do towards one's neighbour. This standard is very individual. Some beings have the heart to inflict upon other beings great mental and physical sufferings while others have not the heart to allow themselves to behave at all like that towards their fellow beings. Indeed, are there not even beings who would rather suffer themselves than inflict even the slightest suffering upon others?
      Thus people belong to different more or less high or low standards of neighbourly love. But it is common to all beings that if they happen to inflict upon their neighbour some harm or suffering which is below their particular standard of love (or that which they otherwise would normally have the heart to inflict upon their neighbour in the way of discomfort or suffering) they come into conflict with their own normal or real standard of consciousness. As this standard of consciousness is the same as the individual's general mental condition, he conflicts through the above-mentioned act with his general mental condition. He will be mentally ill. It is such a disease we call "guilty conscience".
      A bad conscience then is the same as a feeling of "remorse" and "guilt" concerning the discomfort or suffering one has inflicted upon one's neighbour. One feels that one has committed a "sin" or an "injustice" against the person concerned. This feeling is practically unchanged by any opinion, explanation or conviction that one is innocent. Only the very unloving person or the person who feels very little guilt will be able to assert his innocence with the help of cosmic analyses or through the recognition that every being is the primary true provoker, cause or originator of his own fate. The very loving and therefore very "guilty" being cannot be calmed by the mere recognition of cosmic innocence.
      Thus, since the feeling of guilt is as we see present in the loving being in situations in which its originator physically and openly is quite innocent (as well as in the being with cosmic consciousness, to whom it long ago has become realistic knowledge that no one can suffer or do wrong), it becomes a fact that its appearance is not exclusively due to the feeling of guilt, but it must be an expression of another deeper, normal mental phenomenon, quite independent of absolute guilt or innocence. This phenomenon I will term the "axis of consciousness" of the individual. As this "axis" (which means the harmony normal for the developmental stage of the individual concerned of the interplay between his own mental energies and those of his surroundings, his fellow beings and so his "neighbour") is the basis of his mental or psychic general condition, this general condition will naturally be disturbed to the same degree as this "axis" is off balance. One must thus understand that this "axis" has a certain mental "tilt" by means of which it keeps the consciousness of the being in contact, suitable for its normal well-being, with the mental structure which constitutes the basis of the highest and eternal laws and government of the universe (the consciousness of God) in the same way as the tilt of the axis of the earth constitutes a contact with the sun necessary for the temporary well-being of the globe (its inhabitants' normal development and gaining of experience). The being's normal mental "tilt of the axis" is thus the same as its normal attitude to its particular temporary evolutionary stage, this attitude being equal to its satisfaction with the special phenomena of the above-mentioned stage. In other words, the normal, mental "tilt of the axis" of the individual is the same as the form of manifestation or display of consciousness which is the highest ideal of its stage. This ideal is thus the highest mental point of balance of the individual or the standard of its normal will and capability. Thus at this point of balance we have the above-mentioned standard of love of the being or the field of what he "has the heart" to do to his surroundings, to fellow beings and to things. This mental "tilt of the axis" is very different in different living beings. The equilibrium between the mentality of the carnivore and that of its surroundings expresses a different point of balance from the equilibrium between the mentality of the herbivore and that of its surroundings; just so "the tilt of the axis" of the consciousness or equilibrium between the mentality of, for instance, a head-hunter and that of his neighbour is quite different from the point of equilibrium between the consciousness of world-redeemers and that of their neighbour. We know, however, that the particular standards of people, however different they appear to be as to what they "have the heart" to do to their neighbour, after all express for each single individual a temporary highest normality. That it does not remain so, but moves on towards a higher and higher morality or standard of love, we already know as "evolution".
      Evolution is thus just a normal change of the mental "tilt of the axis", a normal shifting of the relationship between a being and the Godhead. All living beings are thus through their mental "tilt of the axis" mentally and organically rooted in a certain relation to the consciousness of God (the surroundings and their neighbour) just as the mutual relationships of the globes and their orbits in space are bound by the equilibrium in the interplay between their mutual radiation of energy in infinite space. This equilibrium is then seen in their "tilt of the axis". Even "the tilt of the axis" of the globes is subject to a normal shifting. The poles move. When the shifting occurs in a normal way, the general condition of the life of the globe is not disturbed. But should it happen that the globe suddenly came too close to another celestial body, its normal tilt of the axis would be disturbed by the alien globe's power of attraction, and enormous devastation, with earthquakes, cyclones and floods, would happen to its living beings. Indeed, the globe itself would at worst be completely smashed to pieces, burned up and thus disappear from the physical plane.
      In the same way, however, as abnormal shifts of the axis may occur to globes, these abnormal "shifts of axis" may occur to other existing living beings, for instance to terrestrial human beings.
      While the natural or normal "shift of the axis" (normal development) does not bring about any disturbance of the general condition of the individual, the unnatural "shift of the axis", however, will create a disturbance of the general condition, which at worst may also lead to a fatal catastrophe for the being concerned. This unnatural shift of the "tilt of the axis" is, as for the globes, always caused by too strong an influence from surrounding forces. This excessive outside influence brings about a sudden shift of the stabilisation of the "tilt of the axis" which is necessary for the normal well-being of the individual, after which the alien forces, in accordance with their superiority, control the consciousness of the being and will lead it towards a catastrophe or mutilation. It is the superiority of these alien forces we experience in the shape of "guilty conscience", "feelings of guilt" etc. It is, however, also the shift of the normal "tilt of the axis" caused by these forces which is the basis of insanity, mental retardation or in short all mental defects.
      As for the guilty conscience or feeling of guilt, the fact is that the sufferer has discovered his abnormal mental shift.
      Thus we all have a certain particular mental "tilt of the axis", which rules the conditions of our mental balance or the harmony in our consciousness between ourselves and our environment. If we, for instance, accidentally inflict a greater or smaller wound or discomfort upon our neighbour which gives us a guilty conscience or feeling of guilt, it means that we have accidentally performed an act which admits an influx of alien mental energies into our consciousness. It is a matter of course that this influx of alien energies will quickly bring about a shift of our normal, mental "tilt of the axis", the further we get away from the feeling of possessing the normality which can be nothing but the culmination of the highest mental level of the health of our normal general condition, being the same as the natural joy of existence.
      The joy of existence, which means the true feeling of happiness suitable for the temporary step of development (the normal well-being at the step in question), is thus a mental, organic function. It is the fruit or the effect of a harmonious interplay between the individual's powers of consciousness and those of Nature and his fellow beings (God's display of consciousness), suitable for just this form of experience.
      Everything belonging to the concept "guilty conscience" is thus the same as the uncontrolled passage of alien energies into the individual's area of consciousness; and they will, through their uncontrolled entry, cause a shift of the point of balance of the harmonious interplay between the individual's own energies and those of its environment, which is the exclusive condition for normal, mental well-being. This uncontrolled entry of alien energies creates a different point of balance in the interplay of the energies in the area of consciousness of the individual in question. Thus a conflict is created between the will of the individual and what he happens to call forth. It is such a situation which St. Paul expresses with the words "For the good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do". The "good" which St. Paul "would" thus expresses the ordinary point of balance in the interplay between his own display of energy and that of his environment and thereby also that of his neighbour. It thus constitutes his normal, mental "tilt of the axis". The "evil" which he "would not", but which he nevertheless did, thus shows us the shift of his "tilt of the axis" towards a point of balance or equilibrium in his energies of consciousness which was quite against his will and thereby against his normal joy in life of feeling of happiness. When a being, just as St. Paul did, discovers that the equilibrium or the centre of gravity of his complete function of energy or interplay between his own energy and those of his environment is called forth into manifestations which deviate from what he really considers to be right, normal, natural, or the most loving, it is evident that this discovery can only elicit a "feeling of guilt" or "guilty conscience" quite independently of the fact that it can be proved practically that he himself is quite innocent of what has been done.
      That he is innocent of the deed does not mean, as readers have seen, that his mental "tilt of the axis" has not shifted, nor that he has not become a triggering instrument for the display of forces of which it is against his will to be an instrument. As the shifted "tilt of the axis" means disharmony in his relationship with life, with his environment or his neighbour, which is the same as in his relationship with the consciousness of God, it will naturally be in accordance with the individual's normal standard or level to put an end to this disharmony and thereby to regain harmony in his field of consciousness.
      When the individual therefore in his agony begs for pardon from those beings towards whom he feels guilt about what he has done to them, or when he, lacking this, cries to the Godhead to be pardoned of his "sin" or "guilt", it really just means that he, while he cries, is either consciously or unconsciously imploring the Godhead for help to get his mental "tilt of the axis" brought back into its natural environment and his neighbour restored.
      Thus the problem, as mentioned above, is in its highest analysis, not a question of guilt or innocence but a question of stopping the unnatural shift of the individual's normal mental "tilt of the axis" caused by uncontrolled forces and of bringing it back into its normal position and thereby restoring the harmony between himself and his environment, which is normal for the individual's stage of development.
      It is a matter of course that the problem about "them that trespass against us" is the same and that here it is also more a matter of a mental "tilt of the axis" than a matter of "guilt" and "innocence".
      Thus the thought-concentration "Father, forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us" is not a superfluous naive assertion, a traditional result of primitive superstition; on the contrary it expresses a brilliant divine direction of the consciousness in favour of the stabilisation of a permanent, normal, mental "tilt of the axis" and consequently the normal general condition and divine well-being of the individual's special stage of development.