From the Bible, we know of course that the Pharisee thanked God for all the many virtues he could practise and laws he could fulfil. He was no whoremonger. He was not like the other thieves or robbers. He did not practise at all the many other violations of the law of Moses, in which the others were on the point of drowning. And it is certainly true that a large proportion of these Pharisees or Jewish yogis really had acquired a routine that made them virtuosi in being able to fulfil the letter of the law. Nevertheless, the Bible tells us elsewhere through the mouth of Jesus: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye are like unto whited sepulchers, which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but are within full of dead men's bones and of all uncleanness. Even so, ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity". To become a virtuoso in this area it is indeed not enough, therefore, that one can comply with masses of legally binding regulations. This ability is by itself not neighbourly love at all, even if it is of course a routine that cannot possibly be avoided if the neighbourly love is to be one hundred per cent perfect. As long as the fulfilment of the law is only a directing of the will constructed by intelligence, its motive is usually only a calculated mental ornamentation. With this ornamentation, its creator seeks to raise itself up over the mental proletariat, raise itself up over "publicans" and "sinners". It is the same principle that is repeated in Western countries, but on an even more material level. Here it is not so much the religious ideals that one is consciously trying to get skilled at practising in order to thereby belong to the upper class. Here, the religious ideals are in fact no longer in vogue as they are in the Eastern countries. In the past in these countries, it was the priests with the king at the top as high priest and the wise who were the acknowledged aristocracy. Whoever could not speak here and did not have religious knowledge and skills belonged to the proletariat. Today it is different, and especially in the Western countries. Here the king is no longer some high priest, just as the religious capability is also today neither the foundation nor measuring stick for the aristocracy of the flock or society. On the contrary, those interested in religion are perceived almost as the spiritual proletariat of society. On the other hand, the king has become a secular person and has thus salvaged something of his position in the modern aristocracy, which is of course based as it were on only materialism or economic position. All major proprietors, magnates and rich folk, or all those with great economic independence, today form the acknowledged aristocracy of society, quite regardless of these beings' interest in religion and their religious know-how or inability. They possess the ideal means for living, which make up the model of wishful thinking for a large percentage of the flock, until it becomes clear to the same individuals that their life path will come to stay well clear of such preferential treatment from fate. Then, in many cases, they become bitter, envious of the aristocracy and seek to find vent for this bitterness through one or another policy that can undermine this aristocracy. That this policy becomes more of a camouflaged release of envy than it is a manifestation of true idealism is not difficult to understand here. And politicians or idealists of that kind are the Pharisees of modern materialistic society. They form the Bible's Pharisee principle carried over to the materialistic plane. For both types of Pharisaism, it is true that it is neither idealism nor true neighbourly love, but to the greatest extent selfishness camouflaged as idealism. They both seek to find vent for selfish interests. Religious Pharisaism seeks to impress fellow human beings with its trained-up virtuosity in complying with the law to thereby gain the admiration of the flock, while materialistic Pharisaism seeks to impress the same beings with its politically camouflaged release of envy to win this same admiration, plus the satisfaction of its secret craving for revenge against those beings treated more favourably by fate than itself. In these two forms of Pharisaism, we have an opportunity to see how impossible it is for neighbourly love to evolve in the terrestrial human mentality by merely outer reasoned exercise of the will. The intelligence may, of course, put the outer purely technical phenomena in order, so that the being like the Pharisee seems to comply perfectly with the laws   yet, as we have just seen, this complying with the laws as well as the mentioned policy that is hostile to the rich or the capitalist was absolutely not neighbourly love   but the phenomena were the pinnacle of what a human being can offer from the Christ-ideal towards its surroundings without possessing the evolution of the inner organic structure of which real and true neighbourly love is a product, a secretion or result.