319. As explained above, the "living being" constitutes a triune principle consisting of the I, the consciousness (the ability to create and to experience), and the organism. It was also mentioned that in no case whatsoever could any of these three principles appear or exist by itself as an independent unit completely separate from the other two. Consequently, an I is never found drifting alone without a consciousness and an organism, just as there could never be found a creative faculty which is not connected to an I. And in the same way it is, of course, never possible to find any kind of substance which does not consist of one or another combination of matter, that is, an organised element of movement or energy which, by its very organisation, proves the underlying existence of an "organiser". A living being is thus an entity consisting of three inseparable principles.
      At this point one might object that when a living being "dies" it becomes separated from the principle of matter, for death consists precisely of a disconnection of the I from its organism, and after that separation it would only exist with the two remaining principles: the I and the creative faculty. But this is a very great misunderstanding. In actual fact death is not a separation of the I from its organism, but on the contrary is a separation of the I from its physical body. This body is only one of the organs composing the I's total organism which – as already indicated in the first volume of "Livets Bog" – consists of five other organs or bodies that the I uses to manifest and reveal itself, and therefore death is only the cessation of the kind of manifestation that was possible for the I through its physical body. But the five other kinds of manifestation that are open to the I through its five other bodies are more than amply sufficient for its eternal continuation as a being which functions, experiences and creates. The reason why it has to change its body at all is because this body is simply a created thing, made up of various kinds of substances and matter intended to act as a tool enabling the I to sense and create in that type of matter of which its current body actually consists. Now, as it is only a tool consisting of substance and matter, it is, like any other tool, subject to the law of wear and tear. No tool is able to carry out its purpose without exerting resistance against the very material for which it acts as its user's means of control. But by exerting resistance or friction against this other material it becomes itself the target of the resistance exercised by this other material. In the long run, this resistance cannot avoid having an undermining effect upon the tool. Even quite microscopically small units of resistance every day, hour, minute or second cannot but eventually cause such a multitude of small injuries and breakdowns in the tool's solid substance that it finally becomes totally unusable. Here the ancient saying would apply: "Many drops of water wear away a stone".
      This process can easily be observed concerning the physical body. One can see how the I builds it up from a tiny microscopic seed to greater and greater perfection until it reaches the stage of the greatest productive capability for the I. But the I cannot continue to maintain its maximum productive capability, and the more such a body is used, the sooner will its beautiful and perfect appearance deteriorate, only to break down at last and become unusable. We even have names for the various stages that the body shows throughout its lifetime. Thus we speak of an "embryonic stage", a stage of "childhood", of "youth", of "maturity" and of "old age". What are these stages but the ordinary stages of every created physical thing? Through the stages of being an "embryo", "child" and a "youth", the body is built up and trained to become a complete and perfectly usable physical tool for the I. We see how it has its "golden era", after which it "ages", which, of course, is nothing but the multitude of microscopic destructions, eventually becoming so concentrated that they are visible in the form of a weakening of that previously so beautiful body and its productive capability. And these effects on the appearance and manifestation of such a "living being" prompt us to use expressions such as "feeble", "decrepit" or someone who has "one foot in the grave". But naturally, these descriptions have nothing whatsoever to do with the identity of the I itself as a "living being". In no case whatsoever can they possibly refer to anything but the wear and tear on the physical tool or body of the living being in question. Inevitably the I has existed as this body's absolute "primary cause" and as such must inevitably have preceded its creation, just as, in the same way, the I will inevitably exist after the body's decay.