When the infant, in consequence of this impulse, feels the sense of hunger calling for food, and such food as its infantile nature requires, it cries; but the supply of that demand is only necessary to cause it to cease its crying. This is because the child is free from those lusts which attach to persons advanced in years. “Of such is the kingdom of heaven.” The child does not lust after things that shall gratify or tickle its palate; it only seeks for those things which it needs; and when they are supplied, it ceases calling for more. But with the advance of age it learns of lustful parents, or by being acted upon by lustful influences, to seek gratification through lust, while in its original unperverted state it knows no impulses but those which are natural, and, consequently, it obeys the true and divine law.
Without stopping to inquire into the origin of lust, I may say that it originates in man’s ignorance, necessarily. If you recollect the figure in the parable of the Garden of Eden, you remember that the sin committed by Eve was eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. That is where we all eat. But I do not propose to dwell upon the nature and origin of this lust in man, but merely to speak of it as being that which characterizes him in his lowest sphere of being. It brings him into antagonism with his neighbor and God. It is that which begets in him so much crime, and which brings ruin upon the world. That is lust which leads him to seek after self-gratification irrespective of any need, while the true impulse only leads him to seek to supply those things which are _really_ needed. The impulse belonging to the lower sphere may be characterized as lust. The idea which obtains so generally in society, that lust belongs only to animal, sensual, or sexual desires, is, therefore, erroneous.
Man may seek gratification in every plane of his being; not only in what he eats and drinks, but also in the intellectual plane. He may seek to gratify a vain curiosity. When he feels restless, he goes off searching after amusement. Time hangs heavy on his soul. There is a perishing need calling for action, and he knows not whence it comes, and he seeks to “kill” this time by amusement or otherwise. This is lusting, not in the animal sense, but in the intellectual sense. He may also lust in the moral plane. What are called friendships in the world, are distinguished by lusts. You know how the world selects its friends: it selects them according to the pleasure it expects to derive from them. Is it not so? Does not the selfish man and woman select friends with reference to the enjoyment they expect to derive from their association with them? And are they not most constant in their attention to those who are most successful in administering to their enjoyment? Look at this, each of you. Look over the list of your friends, and tell me _really_ what is the basis of your friendship. You love your friends, you say. Why do you love them? You love to be with them. Why? You seek their society. Why? Some of your friends you love best. Tell me why it is that you love them best. You say they are the most agreeable to you, and hence you love to be with them. Is that the highest basis? If so, when they cease to administer to your gratification, what relation will you hold to them then? It is said that “prosperity makes friends, and adversity tries them.” They can make it pleasant for us when they are with us, and in prosperity; but when adversity comes, their position is not quite high enough for us; and we prefer those differently conditioned. This remark is in accordance with the statement, that the friendship of the world is based upon the principle of gratifying ourselves. In making your morning calls, you sometimes visit your friends from a sense of duty; and are influenced by the fear that they will find fault with you if you follow your feelings in the matter, and go where you will derive the greatest amount of pleasure.