Spiritual Guidance & Insights – Q&A
Discussions on the book Lifting the Veil of Duality by Andreas Moritz
To enable a thorough search for specific information on this page, you can find it by pressing Ctrl+F on PC (Command+F on Mac) and typing the keyword in the box that appears at the top of the page.
You may also find your answers from Andreas’ videos on Lifting the Veil of Duality by clicking here.
Q. Thank you for your provocative book, Lifting the Veil of Duality. Much of it I track with, yet it also raises troubling questions regarding its implications and applications, and the nature of what is regarded as good and evil. If lost angels and dark workers are really secret unrecognized change agents and come here as vivid reminders of our separation from oneness, then how are we to embrace them, as expressions of good? The implications of this are troubling.
If you take one of the most obvious reference points, the Holocaust, then one would have to make the case to survivors that the camps were actually an expression of good, not evil — a circumstance I would not like to undertake. Now, one might say the Holocaust prompted Jews to then create the state of Israel in 1948, but what good has come out of that except more arbitrary separatist identity, religious strife and land dispute, the eternal struggle that God is embedded in the land. Neither the triggering event nor the result of the event has inspired evolutionary change of a life-affirming sort.
It is one thing to say, as you do, that death is not an enemy and quite another to say that death of any kind, on any scale, is an expression of rebirth and renewal. This view would seem to give permission to every expression of destruction — which I don’t believe you want to endorse.
A. You are raising excellent points here. First, I want you to know that I had little choice when I started to write the book. It was written automatically while friends and I were driving through parts of California. I was in the back seat with a note pad, writing down the flood of information that was downloaded into me. Within 8 days the book was written, although it took me several months more to elaborate, fine tune, and bring in other elements I thought needed to be there. So some of the concepts in the book originated from a much deeper level from which I had conscious access at that time.
As for your points, one purpose of the book is to show that the judgments we make are rooted in the idea that people, situations, circumstances, etc. are good or bad, right or wrong, positive or negative, etc., and that this is real. But that is not so. The judgments come after the fact. Things happen in life. How we look at them is up to us. What is seen to be a calamity for one person is seen as a blessing by another. Neither one is right or wrong. We are constantly moving through emotional experiences that color our perception. If something seems painful, we feel it is bad. If something makes us feel good, we say it’s good.
Holocaust is neither good nor bad. It is. From one angle of perception, it was a terrible disaster. From another perspective, it helped countless individuals clear up unbalanced karmic records that contained similar actions they once did to others during times of genocide, while preventing the nuclear destruction of the planet 15 years later. You can perceive both of these without contradicting one another, and feel compassion for the suffering that occurred while feeling uplifted by the courage of the souls to shoulder their karmic baggage and preserve humanity at the same time. Just seeing things in life as negative without recognizing their positive counterparts leaves us just with sadness, pain, and hopelessness. This is basically what we call depression, the loss of the ability to see the other side of the coin as well. Conflict begins when we divide ourselves into two, by believing there is good versus evil, and they can’t be reconciled.
Q. Taking a more mundane, practical example: traffic laws. Are these good or bad? Should we dispense with stop signs, stop lights and speed limits and the rules of the road because it’s neither good nor bad that they exist? Or should we keep those rules in place to help ensure that some agreed-upon guidelines are followed for the relative safety of all those on the road?
A. There are laws for every level of existence or consciousness. Dense consciousness requires more restrictive laws to prevent chaos. Higher consciousness requires less restrictive laws.
Driving cars belongs to the lower density. Flying UFOs require very few rules. UFOs are not machines that operate like our flying machines. They are an extension of the consciousness of those who use them. They can shape-shift, dematerialize, move from A to B in zero time, etc., all characteristics of consciousness. UFO spacecrafts are living beings. As such they don’t require traffic laws to prevent accidents, just like human beings walking on the streets don’t bump into each other all the time, as long as they are not drunk and keep their eyes open. Our current, still very crude technologies require very basic rules and laws.
The more we rise to an awareness of oneness such as many ET beings have realized it, the less we need to separate ourselves from the rest of creation. It becomes our extended self. So, in not too distant times, we will use flying machines with no need for traffic controllers. We will be able to move forward and backward in time. We will use simple natural devices in our hand that will move heavy objects simple by pointing toward them, simply because we will no longer see them as being separate from us, just as these ETs use their spacecraft at will. The thought of flying to the moon instantly transports them there, in zero time.
Q. It would seem that one could easily argue that duality is actually a good thing, for it creates choice which is intrinsic to the beauty of life and to all of the expressions including music, painting, and literature. If this were not true, why not call your big book: “The Time-Bound Laws that Ensure only Disease will Prevail”.
By your very title, (Timeless Secrets of Health and Rejuvenation), the notion of creating one’s health is mapped out as a good thing; indeed, that remarkable book is packed with thousands of secrets for taking control of one’s health as opposed to surrendering it to other authorities. So, Timeless Secrets very much subscribes to duality which, in my mind, is what helps to create a pathway for its powerful message: CHOICE EXISTS.
A. That is correct. While dealing with the duality level of life, we use different methods to balance the two opposite aspects, until balance is created and we are able to be both, without being attached to either. One day, this book will be completely outdated. The rules apply only on the current level that most people live their lives.
Q. On another level, duality helps create emotional texture and richness. Without it, what role would tears and laughter play? Without it, why would you choose such a rich palette of colors for your paintings and reference them to different body parts instead of say, only using black? So, one might well argue that duality helps create choice, value, variety, definition, richness of expression, as well as the momentum of vision combined with action.
Gandhi may very well have intended to bless the assassin’s bullet, yet he dedicated much of his life to ending British rule through mass civil disobedience. Would he have become a more forceful spiritual leader if he had become neutral toward oppressive taxation, poverty, the liberation of women, caste discrimination? His advocacy of non-violence, even in the most extreme situations, never wavered, yet it was anchored in a struggle of opposites. Again, duality — which he transcended through action, was also the conduit through which he acted.
A. Absolutely true, but this is not the only truth. There is a level of consciousness that can enjoy all these expressions while being free of their limiting influence, almost like people on the other side. My dead mother and father have a fantastic life on the other side, and they tell me about all the wonderful things they are doing. Yet they have no more sense of pain or suffering like we have, yet they have profound feelings similar to our emotions. They are real, just without pain. We are heading toward living like that here while still in a human body.
Q. You write of otherworldly dramas, characters and outcomes with great authority and conviction (if not humility, which surprises me) and yet I would not envy the task of making the case before a world stage that “unbalanced karmic records” are the rationale for genocide and nuclear prevention. The great violent mysteries of history cannot be explained with the concept of great debt — for that notion is also fed by the river of opposites, that any individual or group must repay what they originally took.
In that view, the ledger is still framed in terms of credit and debit, so the cycle continues through historical memory, rather than spiritual unboundedness. The record is not cleared, but scribbled upon again — how else to describe the perpetual tug of war that circumscribes the Middle East? Good and evil may be married, but the exact wording of the vows has not yet been fully revealed.
A. I don’t believe people with a mindset limited to just physical existence and disconnected from a larger reality will be attracted to reading this book. It wouldn’t make much sense to them. And I wouldn’t speak to them of these issues unless they could understand them. The book was never intended to persuade anyone or to change the world. It was meant to serve as a mirror, reflecting whatever we can see, understand and know.
I don’t believe in paying off karmic debts as being part of life. This concept stopped making sense to me when I had to go the Catholic priest once every 2-3 weeks to confess my sins. The word karma has been much misused and misinterpreted. It means action. And action creates reaction. The reaction creates another reaction, and so forth. That’s all there is to it. There is no notion of good or bad involved, the interpretation comes later. The bible says an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, or as you sow so shall you reap. Karma’s sole purpose is to restore balance, not to punish. Nobody is ever punished. For one person a cancer seems like a form of punishment. For another, the same cancer serves as a means to change the course of his life, empower himself, and live more consciously than ever before. Where is the punishment in that?
It always depends on each person to determine whether a karmic situation will turn out to be a punishment or a blessing. That requires making a choice. Free will is the one factor we all have and it will determine what becomes of us, regardless of our experiences in the past (karma). The so-called negative karma has only one purpose to serve, that is, to give the doer the opportunity to end blaming himself for any wrong doing and to accept himself regardless of what he has done, how he looks, what disease he suffers from, what car accident he was involved in, or how miserable he seems to be. Negative situations prompt us to love ourselves more. These opportunities keep coming along every so often. Some grasp them, some don’t. Free will always reigns even when it seems there is no choice.
Other Questions on Spirituality
Q. Andreas, what are your thoughts on cremation?
A. I personally prefer cremation. When the soul disassociates with the body, it usually has no more interest in and connection with it whatsoever. It doesn’t expect anyone else fussing over it, either.
However, some souls who were very attached to the physical body while embodiment and had a lot of fear of death or didn’t see it coming, may have cords of attachment to it that prevent it from moving on in to the vastness of light and love that awaits them. In such cases, cremation would be a tremendous advantage because it helps to sever these cords more quickly and, sometimes, immediately. Otherwise, it makes no difference to the departed. It is more for the bereaved, who may feel better with one choice than the other. The remains are merely a collection of atoms that become dispersed.
Ashes to ashes is my preference. It has the advantage of not crowding cemeteries. It may also help the loved ones to let go more easily, not having a grave to go to that they may believe has a real person lying in there, which of course isn’t true. Souls, who cannot really die, don’t inhabit a skeleton. A graveyard is not a place where they can be found. But they quickly come to us when we visit them in our heart.