Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 1:38 pm
I can resonate with much of this. Just to be clear, while I feel that two poets could encounter the same Poetry
, so to speak, their unique talents, vocabularies, sensibilities, muses, etc, would result in two novel takes on that Poetry
, and thus two distinctive poems.
This is really at the core of the matter. People rebel against higher knowledge because they imagine that they can do everything by themselves. They say "I don't need some god to dictate to me how to write my symphony". This is the great misunderstanding - that the divine beings do the same
things as we do, except, since they are so benevolent, they only try to be suggestive and not assert themselves too much. It's only natural that most people see that as someone breathing down your neck. They think "Just leave me alone, I understand that you know more than me but I want to bang my head on my own for a while. What's the point if I simply do everything right by repeating your thoughts and intents like a puppet?"
This is how people generally feel about the divine and the reason they can't see it otherwise is that they can't even imagine
that these beings might be doing something else
. This is the great difficulty. That in order to understand what the higher beings are doing we need to develop new degrees of freedom of our own consciousness. As Einstein allegedly said: you can't understand that which you can not imagine. The living Cosmos is too efficient for two beings to be doing the same thing. What the muses do is very different
from what Mozart does. Neither the muses can or need to create sensory music, neither a human being can engineer the higher order curvatures of the spiritual world. What Mozart does is to translate into sensory musical language something which lives on another level. Exactly as you say, this translation is not one-to-one. There's no single or right way to do that translation, just like a n-gon can only approximate a circle, no matter how finely it breaks it down.
We should get that clear. What we do with our human thinking, feeling and willing lives at a level of resolution of the Cosmic spectrum which higher beings do not need to control directly. They say "We're doing our job, you're doing yours. Even though we see and understand what you are doing, it will be too tedious if we had to do it for you. We've gone through that stage long ago. Now we are doing work which you can't even conceive of
unless you put special effort in it".
And this special effort is the real problem. Since people consider themselves finished beings observing reality from the high point of pure awareness, they insist that the degrees of freedom of their imagination cover everything there is about the way the Cosmos works. For this reason they imagine that even if they exist, higher beings have the same human-like goals and interests and they simply breathe down our necks, fighting for control, trying to tell us what to think, feel and do (as a matter of fact there indeed are abnormal beings who fight for exactly this kind of control but this will take us too far to tackle).
We can approach what the higher beings are doing only if we turn attention to everything that we take for granted
. Yes, the higher worlds are not doing the things that we can do anyway - they do the things that we don't even know exist
, let alone can do ourselves. All these things are flattened
in our consciousness, we live in them, they weave our environment, our body, soul and spiritual architecture, yet we seal that tight and take it as some absolute and atomic feature of the wildcard 'consciousness'. We take that for granted and don't conceive that in some other being's perspective it might be the result of creative effort. Instead we imagine that just because we don't recognize anything within the flattened depth, it must be the same for every being. Then we imagine that higher beings' life also consists in drinking beer and we tell them "Don't tell me how to drink my beer, you big wuss." What we take for granted is that there's a world, that there's malt in the world, that we have a mouth to take in and an organ to pee out the beer. All this we take as some unquestionable matter of course. We imagine that even if all the higher worlds and beings were to disappear, we would still be left on the porch drinking delightedly. Little that we conceive of is that there might no longer be a mouth, malt, porch, planet, gravity, space, time, thoughts and feelings of delight, unless there were higher order intelligences which support these archetypal structures with their spiritual activity, and within
which we experience the drinking of the amber liquid.