Which town?

in ourselves, we give it with real humility to the Supreme = this simple law She had often enunciated now confronted us all to the rigor of the true work of consciousness.

*

Thus, in our pursuit of freedom, we had bravely emancipated ourselves from the guardianship of a Society which, claiming legal rights of property over all lands, funds and assets as over the project itself, intended to dictate how every volunteer participant must live and behave : we had shaken off the yoke at the risk of destitution and of being branded outlaws, imprisoned or deported = it was noble, it was laudable, it was romantic – and help had indeed come, substantial and concrete. But what exactly was the nature of this help and was it not up to us to exert that much more vigilance and awareness so that it actually may serve the truth of Her city? The principle of no-ownership is an evolutionary key for our human consciousness only insofar as we grasp it in relation to the Divine = when She had been asked to whom would the lands of Her city belong, She had simply answered, “to the Supreme”. This is not a metaphor, these are not symbolic terms, and it is not a way of spiritualizing the physical reality: it is a precise indication of the determinism that must reign over our lives and actions. Likewise, when She would remind that all material goods and energies, all objects and equipments must be treated with utmost care and respect for the welfare of all and that on this condition alone one had the right to utilize them, it was about the same offering and the same realization = everything comes to us from the Supreme, everything belongs to the Supreme, the Supreme alone must be our guide and our law.

230