If we were to be able to recognize the stumbling blocks it would often be easier to avoid or recognize them. We would therefore like to suggest some of the reasons why for many people their personal development with respect to the basic rights of existence simply remains just a good intention, or merely a thought, and is at best partially and often not at all converted into reality.
The predominant theme is that of economic development. This becomes more and more an end in itself, a spiral, which turns ever faster. We become used to simply consuming, everything can (apparently) be purchased and becomes ever cheaper. What we would really like to do would be to buy pills which we could take over a period of time so that we could automatically develop with respect to the basic rights of existence.
As we have already mentioned in the preceeding chapter, thanks to industrialization and economic development, we should now have lots more time available for our personal development – however we use this available time in general for quite different things: We „devour“ television programmes, films, adventures, travel, sporting events or we «use» this time so that in the future we will have even more money available for consumption. For the majority of us it is therefore high time that we got out of this spiral – in other words it is «time for a change».
Those who deny those occurrences or characteristics in their lives which cannot be rationally explained, automatically shut themselves off from all considerations about the meaning of life, about the reason for and the objectives of our existence and that of other beings.
Those who want to develop personally with respect to the basic rights of existence, must therefore recognize, that there are things on the earth which we can explain and understand scientifically and there are also things on the earth which we (at least to the present day) cannot explain or understand. Both the parts of our world which can be explained as well as those which cannot be explained still have their legitimacy. Both parts are present whether we accept this or not.
On the other hand many people are less and less critical of the reporting of such events. Whatever appears on the TV screen, is presented in the newspapers or in books is perceived as «the truth» instead of as subjective reporting by the authors or presenters. More and more people take their objectives and values from the press instead of thinking for themselves. The blame for this cannot of course be simply passed on to the media, but rather within the meaning of self-determination or self-responsibility everyone bears the responsibility of whether he will accept external values or objectives and if so, which ones.
Those who realize that they will return to this earth at a later stage are much more ready to treat nature and its resources responsibly. A «don’t care what happens after I’ve gone» mentality, in which little responsibility is perceived for those who come later, is totally foreign to such people. Those who know that they will be born again later so as to continue with their personal development at that place where they ended this life are much more prepared to go from step to step on the long path of personal development and to be pleased about every small success.
Whoever on the other hand sees his personal life as an absolute one-off event, is much more inclined to quickly lose the motivation for personal development in the case of failures and resistance. This is especially true with advancing years, when it becomes clear that the great goal in this life may no longer be achieved. If this is the only life and the goal cannot be achieved within it, why indeed should anyone really strive towards it?
1 Earlier in this discourse we pointed out that neither the existence nor the non-existence of incarnation can be scientifically proven. Each person must decide this for himself with the help of his personal intuition.
If a person really cannot identify himself with reincarnation, he will perhaps accept as a transitional solution the idea that his own «ego» is bequeathed to coming generations. That his descendants inherit his remaining personal and other problems and sooner or later will have to solve them.
It is not that difficult to see as an observer what we or others should actually do in order to live the basic rights of existence in a given situation. However it is exactly what we really should do which is generally the main difficulty. The difficulty doesn’t lie in the theory or in the strategy but in carrying it out in practice.
There is a significant number of people who are not sufficiently aware of this distinction. They believe that in themselves they wish to live the basic rights of existence, but in reality they merely talk about it. As we have seen in earlier sections advances in personal development are only possible by actually implementing the basic rights of existence in our own lives. Just talking about it does not produce any development whatsoever.
We should particularly remember this when we find ourselves wanting to help others with their development by offering good advice. It cannot therefore be repeated often enough: Our maximum personal contribution to the general wellbeing of everything on earth consists in our own personal development, in other words in our personal implementation of the basic rights of existence in our lives, how we ourselves live the basic rights of existence in every situation – and not in participating in discussions or offering advice to others!
It is frequently insufficient to simply take the basic rights of existence as the objective for life. As a rule it is necessary – or at least it is very useful - to consider at the same time how we will assess our personal progress towards living the basic rights of existence. It is especially important to be clear that in letting go of the old objectives it is also important to let go of their assessment criteria.
The regular assessment of our progress should ensure that we also really do get closer to our goal. On the basis of this checking process we can also correct our behaviour if necessary. In making these assessments if we make use of criteria which are only suitable for another goal, then sooner or later we will approach the other goal. If we have incompatible objectives, we will therefore probably get further and further from our originally-selected goal.
Many people continue to try to realize their financial objectives simultaneously with living the basic rights of existence or to measure their success at least partially according to monetary criteria. Sooner or later this must lead to frustration.