Your inner life is your outer life. Your second life is your first life. Your fantasies are your reality.
So shall we get to the way out esoteric stuff?
It begins with a question. Why is there even a quantifiable list of similarities? Why can we list all the primary colors or compare things mathematically? We can teach our children shapes and these relate well enough to real life as to be adequately descriptive of the world around them, isn’t that sort of mysterious?
I read something recently about our ‘channel capacity’ that might relate. For example, the largest number of digits a person can practically remember is seven. That’s why there are seven digits in a telephone number. Our brain has channel limits for things.
We need channels. We need categories, and we didn’t choose to have this trait. Nature set this up for us. If you accept the conventional model of evolution, even it suggests that having to associate things is still an adequate survival mechanism. Isn’t this a wonder? Especially considering how random and chaotic mainstream science says reality is?
It makes one consider there is a design of some kind. Well, as I have said in previous classes, reality itself is seamless. What we tend to reflect on most often is actually the surface or effect level of reality. Is this fair to say?
Well, for one thing we tend to associate things with ourselves, finding similarities and differences. Checking for identity. Humans apply their social instincts to everything, and with reason, though they have spat in the face of that reason in our age.
So we could put all green things into a category, and although that might not make sense on a surface or effect level, all these green things are green for the same reason. The cause of their color is the same cause.
So this law is very foundational in color magic? It is indeed. It is why red is seen as poisonous and dangerous, but also triggers lifesaving instincts.
Photosynthesis? Well, specifically the behaviour of light, but photosynthesis being served by that colour matters also so you are on the right track.
If you could see the world not as a collection of effects, but a collection of causes, what would it look like?
It would look to be full of purpose.
Where would you find any objects to look at in this world of causes?
The next moment of “now”? Even the manifestation of a moment would be imperceptible. It only happens when a set of causes begins to produce effects.
Nothing is an object as it’s all a process? Exactly.
Now all these processes are hidden from perception, or “occult”, not because they form some fringe that genuine reality floats inside of, but because they are so fundamental as to be omnipresent. You can’t isolate them to the behaviour of any one thing.
Each of these supposedly unseen forces is so intense that in order to manifest a creative state at all they must split their energy or potential between a variety of expressions. If the color green were one of these forces and not itself an effect, then it would have to find as many outlets for the flow of green energy as it possibly could.
I remember the Little Prince: “What is of consequence is invisible to the eye.” Excellent quote.
Why is it needed that they split their energies, though? They need to split their energies to allow for the presence of other energies. The hypothetical green force can only manifest causes by a process of things being “not green.” It’s the tension or interference pattern between the unseen forces that lets there be any visible objects at all. The all-encompassing green could never make a universe, nor could the all-pervasive blue.
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.