402. An important factor for the "being in bliss' in his experience of "gold-copies" is reliving his sexual life through all the periods of the spiral. He sees himself revelling in the ecstasies of love, with the fighting spirit of a wild stag in the forest or as a Casanova in the sexual life's later more delinquent, degenerate animal forms. And then again he sees himself live through periods as an "apostle of virtue' in sackcloth and ashes, renouncing legitimate as well as illegitimate pleasures, adhering strictly to moral precepts which have been built more upon stubborn egoistical phenomena and traditions than upon real intellectual and universally beneficial knowledge. He also sees in the "gold-copies" how this "virtuous" state, based as it was on imperfection and total ignorance together with superstition, cast its shadow across his subsequent lives. Here, too, the talent-kernels have become defective and in subsequent lives the individual is unable to create for himself the necessary vital, healthy and beneficial sexual drive which would be normal at that stage. Perversities – that is to say, pathological or abnormal sexual desires and their satisfaction, repeated until a habit has been established – have also created a warping, both mentally and physically, in succeeding lives. It has not improved the situation for him that the deeper cause for this sexual degeneration is found ingrained in the being's change from "animal" to "man", and consequently he would have had to experience his sex-drive in relation to that. In this way a new kind of sexual urge comes to light. In "Livets Bog" it is called "human sexuality" while the old sexuality, relating to marriage, is expressed as "animal sexuality" because it follows completely the traditional "customs of mammals".
      As these two forms of sexual urge are totally opposite – for "animal sexuality" is the basis of egoism, and thereby of the "killing principle", while "human sexuality" is the basis of the ability to "love one's neighbour as oneself" – then obviously, such a transformation at the higher level of the animal kingdom, which is the zone of terrestrial man, must create adversity. The birth of such an important factor could not come about peacefully, for it constitutes the foundation of the individual's complete transformation into "God's image after His likeness" and thus into a being who, in his culminating love of everything and everybody, becomes "one with the Father" and experiences himself as an eternal and immortal "master of time and space". The animal kingdom does not willingly give up its inhabitants. Laws and traditions, customs and practices, ignorance and superstition based on totally brutal and murderous traditions still stimulate and support the sexual rights of possession over other beings, at the same time as being protected by law and blessed by the clergy. Thus, all in all, these facts form a wall or barrier, which an individual's inner sexual transformation must necessarily move towards breaking down. But in doing so the individual becomes a "sinner", a social pariah, disliked by "right-minded" fellow beings. And here we have the whole story of "Man's Fall" in its pure state (see Chapter 53 of my book Logic). But how shall the "ignorant herd" or "the masses" be able to understand certain beings who are beginning to grow out of accepted laws and systems supported by millennia of animal habits of mind? How should beings whose opposite pole is an unconscious and as yet unknown aspect of their own nature be able to understand this new tendency in fellow beings of their own sex? How could beings who have never seen this pole personified otherwise than as perfection in the opposite sex and have come to know this personification as an absolutely indispensable basis for their own happiness, be able to understand that weak – that is to say embryonic – beginning personified in beings of their own sex? How should the buck or the doe in the woods understand any other nature than precisely that which gives them the opportunity for satisfying their mutual longings and their necessary appetite for life? How should it then be any easier for terrestrial man to understand the dawn of a new kingdom as long as his fundamental appetite for life and its satisfaction is still based on the same sexual principle as that of the stag and the hind, or any other "male" or "female" animal? How should a newly engaged young couple with a temporary but almost insatiable appetite for life who are now standing on the brink of their "fountain of life" and are about to quench their thirst, be able to understand this present analysis? Will it not seem just as foolish and meaningless for them as objections against drinking would seem fantastic to a wanderer in the desert exhausted by thirst? Naturally, they have only one single basis for their attitude to the opposite sex within the nature of their own being, which is to view it as a tendency which would undermine their highest happiness and the herd's widespread animal-like traditions and supporting foundation, namely the mating and reproductive system of mammals. And as a matter of course, these beings find themselves obliged to take a stand against the incipient dissolution of their traditions of happiness and to consider these new tendencies in the consciousness as "falling into sin" and as "forbidden fruit".