Cosmic Self. The Source of Reality
It has been awhile since my last contribution here. The Aquarium has been engaged in attempting to keep up with the UFO CEO, as Joe is sometimes referred to. Hopefully there has been some progress in all of the activity that has been generated. The UFO tree has been shaken, and some things have come to ground. Whether we are closer to the truth remains to be seen.
In this same time frame I have also had some interaction with Jack Sarfatti regarding his ‘post-quantum’ metaphysics. Jack claims to have an objective way of explaining consciousness. I remain skeptical. Certainly we should push the objectivist program to its logical limits if nothing else than to better define the subjective pole of reality. Once that pole is admitted to the pantheon of reality, reality will have to be redeployed about that source.
It is reasonable that the Self is a process with a trinitarian structure. There is a self, an other, and a mediating entity. That primordial trinity is then ramified into humanity and all the heavenly host. Each created self partakes of the primordial transcendence. The ramification can be reversed in a cosmic cycle that is unique. The identity of indiscernibles permits only one human cycle of history. Any other cycle would have to be spiritually orthogonal to ours, making it virtually unintelligible to us, but perhaps still integral to our existence, manifesting another aspect of the cosmic self.
The veil of nature, or Maya, that is the buffer between humanity and the cosmic mind protects Creation. Nature is not transcendental in itself, and science is discovering its limits. The human spirit does not retire within those confines. Inevitably it will find its way back to the source. Seeing the source through the veil is our apocalyptic, pre-millennial revelation. The eschatological millennium is post-historical.
We are very reluctant to relinquish our illusions. It still remains unclear how the deed will actually be done. How much longer can we hang out on the edge of our reality, denying what is all too obvious? The non-theistic mystics claim to transcend all subjectivity, but with what do they transcend? They identify with the void, but what does the identifying? Perhaps they are slipping into one of the orthogonal dimensions where unintelligibility is taken for non-existence. We would have to reconcile this lacuna with our being created in the image of the cosmic self. Can part of that image escape our human ken? Would there have to be an orthogonal Christ? This may be carrying things too far. If we contemplate even one alternative reality we open Pandora’s box. Cosmic discretion may be the better part of such valor. Some answers may reside beyond the eschaton.
- | Contents |