Friday, May 11, 2018
Very well, shall we talk about the plasticity of the present moment? Remembering that it is always the present moment, and that somehow it is the same present moment.
And remembering to hold contrasting qualities in mind as we do so:
- The inertia that amounts to the drag of other minds holding an attitude toward it, and
- The quality that balances that inertia.
They must be examined while keeping in mind their essential unity, lest the idea arise that what is one thing manifesting two ways is actually two things each manifesting separately.
Understood, but – “the drag of other minds holding an attitude toward it”?
It should come clear as we discuss plasticity.
All right.
You know that someone described magic as the art of changing reality in conformance to the will. You have seen Dion Fortune’s lucid explanations of the use of magic, and have read many times in her novels her descriptions of how magical manipulation is accomplished. You have read other accounts, some lucid and many not, all having the air of someone honestly describing things experienced. And of course you have read accounts of magic that were not thought of as magic by the very author of the account. On a personal experiential level, which outweighs all reading (but may be brought into focus by such reading), you have had your own experiences.
You also know that you have always been drawn to history and magic both, although most are drawn more to one or the other, rather than both. Or so you have assumed. The reality is somewhat different. The reality is that you were looking equally outward and inward, and most people prefer to look inward or outward. That is the distinction you noticed, which appeared to you as their outward manifestations.
I see it as you say it. For me, history is the opposing pole. For some it was mathematics or science or fashion or money-grubbing or politics.
Yes. The opposition was – is – between looking inward and looking outward. For some the inward gaze manifests as psychology or religion or philosophy or abstract metaphysics.
Think of it this way: People gazing outward maintain the assured reality of the 3D world. Those gazing inward retain the possibility of altering it by altering themselves. Only – don’t expect this to make sense right away. There is more reorienting to be done, first.
Jung said those who gaze outward dream, and those who gaze inward awaken.
That may be more a paraphrase than a careful statement of fact, but it is in line with what we are saying here, only that statement refers to the effect of such orientation on the individual aspect of reality, and here we wish to look at it on the communal aspect.
Jung was asked if the world could avoid nuclear war and he said it depended on whether enough people were willing to work on themselves.
That’s right, and our discussion here may shed some light on how that relationship between the two could be. He did not mean, It depends upon enough people getting together in coordinated group activity. He meant what he said, because he knew the indivisible unity of the human mind. He also knew that the overarching mind has local divisions, but he knew that the unity was there.
So if you will hold in mind our discussion of the inertia that holds the world in being, you will perhaps redefine plasticity as a different kind of inertia, the inertia that holds the world in being as it changes aspect.
Let me try.
Yes, go ahead.
Inertia may be defined as the force (or tendency, or whatever) that makes an object at rest want to remain at rest, but it is equally the force that makes an object in uniform motion remain in that motion. This is stated clumsily, but I can see that an object at rest and an object in uniform motion are actually the same condition, only language makes them seem like two different states. That’s why inertia covers them both, because they aren’t really a “both,” but a unity.
Good, so try again.
In terms of your present exposition, inertia v. plasticity doesn’t mean no-change v. change. It means, the continuity aspect v. the alteration aspect. That’s the best I can do at the moment.
Not so bad. The important distinction to be drawn is that it is not a matter of two forces – or even of one force seen in two aspects – enjoining either stillness or motion.
But the point here is that that living present moment has its inertia, a living moving thing, not a dead unmoving thing that must be overcome. “Drag” is a relative term meaning, in context, a tendency to be slower than the desired motion. This is not a scientific description, mind you.
So I guess the question at hand is somewhere between, “What causes change in the living present moment?” and, “How can any of us or several of us working together effect such change?”
And we say, in practical terms, look to scripture and magical practice. In theoretical terms, we’ll continue.
The scripture I had in mind was Jesus advising people to pray two or three together, though that wasn’t quite the context. Magical practice isn’t so different, I suppose – or maybe prayer should be considered to be a magical practice.
And what does prayer or magical incantation seek to do?
Yes, I get it. They seek to connect humans to a super-human level of power or awareness or state of being.
The vagueness at the end of your statement shows you the vagueness of your thought in that respect. Vagueness is always a flag indicating an area that could do with some thought.
A better way to say it would be –?
Prayer – any magical incantation – seeks to remind a 3D being of its essential All-D nature so that it may transcend the limitations that follow from its self-definition as a (merely) 3D being.
But to say that is not to say that there aren’t forces at a higher level.
Of course not. But it moves beyond the obvious “reaching for assistance from higher forces” to the more subtle fact that those “higher forces” are in intimate unbreakable relation to the 3D beings themselves. In a sense, everybody is connected not only laterally (so to speak) bit hierarchically.
Because 3D humans can focus, they are useful to the rest of reality.
Because they tend to get stuck in that focus, they require assistance.
And I guess this brings us to consideration of the vast impersonal forces you have been mentioning?
Not quite. It brings us to consideration of vast personal forces, which are not the same thing. These are not the weather but the raincoat, though that seriously diminishes their role. They are your allies in the battle, your assistance in bringing in the crops before it rains, your larger mind helping you function. Any number of analogies possible; season to taste. For the moment, say the personal v. the impersonal, and leave it at that, while remembering that all oppositions, all polarities, are ultimately part of one unbreakable unity.
Well, there’s our hour and a little more, and as so often, it doesn’t seem like we’ve gotten very far.
Yes, and do you know why it feels that way sometimes? It is because you get a sense of a larger field of view, and the contrast between what you vaguely sense and the little that we can spell out at the moment is discouraging.
I suppose. Very well, till next time.