Answer: A man. A woman cannot be a teacher. She can be his assistant, and also not always. In any case, the image of the teacher, the image of the instructor, the image of the leader—it is a man.
Question: What should practical lessons for women include? Should women discuss men?
Answer: They spend very little time discussing both men and themselves. They study this objectively.
We only try to organize lessons for them and limit the games and joint events, to avoid interfering with their inner part or making them feel forced or obligated. After all, our entire system is integral, it is only built on awareness. Without awareness, a person does not advance. His or her advancement only depends on the degree of their realization of their own desire for inner movement and personal change.
This is why women begin to work inside gradually, only to the extent of their comprehension of the material, and not based on the contact between them. And if they are in group, it is only to discuss the studied material, but never from a personal perspective, like in the men’s group.
Comment: Today we observe a mixing of roles. And what we are talking about now is a well forgotten past.
Answer: No, the modern mixing of roles is artificial. It is not natural, but imposed. And people can be easily stripped of the things done to them today. We see that everything that manifests today is superficial and external. The fact that a woman is becoming manlike in her internal and external states is just a manifestation of the mutating egoism.
I do not think that we should continue playing with it; rather, we should instead return to nature. If we wish to advance towards harmony with nature, under no circumstances should we go in the direction of what our society has done with us.
From a “Talk on Integral Education” #10, 12/16/11