QUESTION: Could you elaborate on what exactly is meant by "union," just what does it entail?
ANSWER: The concept of union can be discussed on two levels. I mean as far as our subject here is concerned. I do not speak now of union with God. In the highest sense, union is the melting and fusing together of two beings who were split. It is when two beings become one entity again. Union on this earth sphere between a man and a woman strives for the same end, and attempts it to some degree inwardly. In rare moments it can happen. But all the layers of ignorance and fear soon erect a separating wall again. The aim of development is to destroy these separating walls, whether they stand between man and God, between man and spiritual truth and reality, between man and his fellow creatures, or between man and woman. Love is the only key to eliminate this wall. With love, understanding is open. And with understanding, oneness or union can be achieved. But love cannot be forced. Love can only be gained by removing all blocks and errors in the human soul. Ego importance and preoccupation are directly opposed to love. But before the little ego can be removed, it has to be recognized in all its facets; it has to be allowed to come to the surface. Then, and then only, can the true personality evolve, which no longer needs what the little ego seems to need. Then love can truly unfold -- and thereby union.
QUESTION: A few of us discussed why it is so difficult for men to communicate when there is an emotional problem between two partners. The women try to talk it over and men evade it. Is that the shame of the emotional side?
ANSWER: Yes, that is one reason. It is certainly connected with that subject. Man shies away from emotions, he is afraid of them; partly due to the rather frequent misconception I mentioned before, namely that emotions are dangerous and that if one cannot avoid them, then one must somehow keep them a secret, at least when they bring negative results. Misunderstandings are negative results, therefore they are a reminder of this wrong conclusion. And partly due to these mass images, which claim that it is beneath a man's dignity to enter into intellectual discussion with a woman, who is supposed to be his inferior. This might be done on a neutral topic, but when personal guilts and inadequacies enter into the picture, which is inevitable in disagreements or quarrels, man is afraid that he may not be able to cope with the woman and thereby jeopardize his masculinity. Since it is woman's nature to dwell on emotional subjects, on anything personal, she is "prepared," conditioned, and often better versed in this respect than the man. Thus, the man is afraid of "losing." It appears to him that he not only loses the argument, but also a part of his masculine dignity. Just because he has neglected to strengthen his emotional nature, he is afraid and guilty of the weakness he senses in himself.
QUESTION: But since this is almost a hindrance to union, could you perhaps help us as to how we should go about it?
ANSWER: Not by forcing it. The only way you can go about it is not by convincing the other. Development and the solution of problems can rarely happen that way, but by searching for that in yourselves which attracts a negative response. On this Path, you have found some such incidents already, even though the obvious wrong was on the other side, even though you never thought it possible that anything could be amiss with yourself, even though your rationalizations were most convincing and true. The more often you succeed in that, the nearer you are to the solution of all your inner and outer problems. If you find your hidden emotions, you will understand why other people respond negatively to something that you were convinced did not contain but the purest motives. What I said before about marriage in this respect holds true at all times, and for all instances.
QUESTION: Am I to understand that a woman should show signs of weakness so as to make the man strong?
ANSWER: No, quite the contrary. When you re-read this lecture, you will see that this was not implied at all. She should show her real strength, not being afraid of it. Then she will be able to use it constructively and not compulsively seek to hide it, or to use it destructively by letting it out because of an inner rebellion which is not fully understood. Only in this way can she also help the man to unfold his real strength. If she were to make herself weak out of "diplomacy" or flattery, it would be an enforced and ungenuine reaction. Nothing compulsive and ungenuine could ever be truly beneficial, not really. It would only affect an unhealthy, superimposed, and equally ungenuine layer of the man in question.
QUESTION: But if a man doesn't communicate with a woman out of cowardice, what would be the corresponding feature to look for in the woman?
ANSWER: You cannot generalize that. It might be any one of so many alternatives. You can never make a general statement of this sort. That could be very dangerous and misleading. It can only be found by the individual work. It could perhaps correspond to an over-activity in the woman, a mischanneled activity that was not allowed to develop freely. It could also correspond to a different kind of cowardice, on another level, in the woman in question. It may be any of a number of factors. It may not only be one factor, but a combination of many.
QUESTION: What is the reason that we have two kinds of hormones?
ANSWER: The male and female hormones are a physical aspect of this entire subject. In fact, both sexes have both hormones. A woman could not live without male hormones and a man without female hormones. This physical manifestation is a proof of both aspects existing in both sexes. It is the outer symbol. It is only a question of the proper balance and distribution.
QUESTION: What exactly is meant by this that man gives spiritual birth?
ANSWER: Man, in his real, creative self, can give birth to beautiful and constructive ideas which can become useful and workable on all realms, not only in the physical world. Ideas, thoughts are alive. You have often heard the expression, but you take this as a figure of speech. In reality the process of the birth of an idea takes place according to the same principles as physical birth. Since woman is also creative, she too can give spiritual birth -- and she does. It is only the female side in an entity's nature which is capable of giving birth. In woman, the female side is mostly and foremost turned outwardly on the "disc," so that physical birth manifests. However, this does not prevent her from also giving mental and spiritual births at other times, when this facet may slide inwardly. (I realize it is hard to express and therefore my words may often appear over-simplified when it comes to such matters). Man, on the other hand, has the female, birth-giving side of his nature turned inwardly at all times. It is almost impossible to find the right words to explain these things to you, but it may open new vistas for you to broaden your understanding and perception, even though my words are limited at best.
The Guide
by Eva Pierrakos
April 1, 1960
Copyright 1960, the Center for the Living Force, Inc.