Martinus: Livets Bog, vol. 5, sect. 1641

1641. In our comprehensive study of "Livets Bog", we have come so far as to establish as fact for us that all manifestation and all substance or matter constitute stages in a cycle. This cycle is in turn a mental movement from darkness to light, and from light to darkness, and from darkness back again to the light, and so on continuously. Since the overall effect of this movement, which is the principal hallmark of life, is one hundred per cent logical, it constitutes the culmination of wisdom and love. Everything is thus "alive". All movement, all functioning, all release of energy is ultimately or entirely a mental function. But when the whole reveals or manifests itself as a mental function, which means, through a living, conscious exercise of will, who or what is thus this whole? Can a mental function, a revelation of wisdom and love be a manifestation of a dead thing? Can a dead thing be the source of intentions? Can a dead thing wish that the structure of the universe as a whole, and thereby all existing releases of energy, movements and manifestations, should appear in a way that is adapted so advantageously to the whole that they can be expressed by the eternal answer: "Everything is very good"? And who but a fool or intolerant apostle of ignorance and naivety would dare to claim that the revelation of this enormous world scene, this colossal ocean of energies, forces and movements is not intended to create reactions? Why should a movement occur at all if its purpose was not to influence something that can feel this influence and react to it? It would be completely meaningless to influence something that is dead, something that cannot experience or react to the influence. Influencing dead things for the dead things' own sake negates the process. What could be the use of dead things if they were not at the same time intended to influence the senses of living beings? All forms of movement in the world, indeed, including everything from the trajectory of the stars and planets in the macrocosmos to the movement of particles of energy in the microcosmos, have but one purpose, namely, to influence the senses of living beings. Denying or refuting this is the same as building one's life on an abnormality. It is to swear by the culmination of delusion and superstition. It is to worship death instead of life. But does one believe that in the long run one can continue swearing by a view of life that in itself compromises one's own intellectual ineptitude, one's denial of facts? Is not also this ineptitude, this denial of facts in itself a stage in a cycle, a mental movement between intellectuality and primitivity, a note in the scale between light and dark, between treble and bass?