Answer: It stems naturally from the changes a person undergoes. We don’t set any limitations; we don’t demand that our listeners comply with any conditions or conventions except during the lesson. In order for a person to perceive correctly the material we study, we limit ourselves to one topic only or to several topics that can come under the main topic of the lesson.
On the whole, there are different situations that the participants feel, from rejection to acceptance, and this repeats interchangeably, in waves. It all has to be studied and discussed. We are really interested in conducting the lessons in the form of a court trial so that people will reveal themselves to the maximum.
Suppose two people who cannot look at one another come to the lesson. They admit it and want to clarify their relationship. Otherwise they will not advance and will hold other people, their group, back. They will be punished for that, so to speak, in the form of a much stronger response on nature’s part because they harm the unity of the group by not being able to work out the relationship between them.
So perhaps under certain pressure from the members of the group (depending on what kind of a descent they are in), the clarifications begin. We are very happy when we encounter such cases, when all of it can be deciphered, researched, and corrected.
From a “Talk on Integral Education” #13, 12/18/11