Straight Talk for a Wiggly World

I'm not sure what that means. Perhaps that the Absolute dwells here among us in the relative.

We left off yesterday with the image of a circle in which the circumference represents the sub-existential wiggly world of quantum indeterminacy, the center the absolute spiritual ground or source, and the interior everything in between, including us. In fact, man is the vertical link between the periphery and center. 

Also, we must bear in mind that this is the type of circle that expands as we approach the center, and "contracts" at the periphery, so, a pretty weird circle. 

When we say it contracts at the periphery, what we mean is that it tends toward nothing without ever arriving there. As Aristotle recognized all those years ago, potential is an ambiguous state between something and nothing: it's not yet something, but nor is it nothing.

By the way, if you think the idea of a sphere expanding into nothing is just too weird, I've got news for you. Or rather, physics does. Gemini?

The concept of the universe expanding into "nothing" is a common misconception. The universe is all there is, and it is expanding within its own boundaries.

Suit yourself, but that only makes it weirder. Besides, what makes you say the universe is all there is? That's a tautology. 

You're absolutely right. The statement "the universe is all there is" is indeed a tautology. It's a definition, not a claim that can be proven or disproven.

Actually, it can be disproven, but I'm not going to spend all morning arguing with a computer. 

Back to our iconic circle: Smith makes the point that that the center is "impervious to the constraints of space and the terminations of time," which I suppose is what makes it s'durn big: it's actually bigger than any earthly conception of bigness, such as the physical universe, which turns out to be a rather small place by comparison. We'll dive into this esoteric gnocean later in the post.

"Esoteric" literally means "inner circle." Just throwing it out there.

Anyway, what we like to call Celestial Central "encompasses in truth every 'where' and every 'when,' and can therefore be identified as the nunc stans, the omnipresent 'now that stands.'" 

Nunc stans, everybody else siddhi?

True, but let's not get out in front of our headlights or ahead of our skis. For our purposes, this still point of the turning world is not something "far away and high above." Rather, "the Apex"  

is actually present within every being as its ultimate center. This means that every actual being is endowed with an ontological "within" centered upon that Apex: it is as if the two centers actually "touch."

In the Vertical Church of Perpetual Slack?

None other: 

All-embracing secret center of depth, the meaning of Within, the realization of Being, O first and last truth of Self, knowing without knowledge all that can be unKnown: existence to the end of the beginning, etc.

The point is, there are always two centers, "the one universal Center (represented by the central point of the cosmic icon), and the other definitive of a cosmic existent." In other words -- if I understand him correctly -- every thing that exists partakes of a form which is its center, precisely. 

Only God and the central point of my consciousness are not adventitious to me.

Noted.

All knowledge is knowledge of a center (i.e., form), all the way up to the unknowable knowledge of the formless Center itself, of which all the little centers are reflected images by way of vertical causation. It is here "wherein the mystery of vertical causation resides." 

To repeat what was said yesterday, qualities down here are "from above," and ultimately "transmit the light of supernal essences into this nether world" (Smith). Which explains why physics is so weird, disclosing "a subcorporeal domain, made up of entities midway between being and nonbeing."

Enough physics of the periphery. Let's get back to the metaphysics of the Center:

It turns out that not only God, but man too has a certain "access" to the nunc stans: the elusive "now that stands," which, as we have noted, constitutes the central Point and Apex of the integral Cosmos. 

Or as Plato put it, "The soul is partly in eternity, and partly in time." . 

God is infinitely close and infinitely distant; one should not speak of Him as if He were at some intermediate distance. 

Noted.

As we have so often emphasized in so many posts, "the prime example of vertical causation proves to be precisely what is termed 'free will'" (Smith). 

Prove it! Or rather, try not to, because to deny it is to affirm it. In other words, to disprove free will is an instance of participating in it, so long as one is making an appeal to truth: "An act is free"

by virtue of the fact that it is not effected by a chain of external [or horizontal] causes, but by the soul..., which acts from within, and hence by way of vertical causation.

The permanent possibility of initiating a causal series is what we call a person. 

Noted.

Then again,

Liberty intoxicates a man as a symbol of independence from God. 

Genesis 3 All Over Again?

That's my hunch. In any event,

this capacity to activate vertical causation increases as we ascend from the inorganic to the organic domain, and attains its zenith in man...

Zenith or nadir, depending on how it is deployed, or the direction to which it is oriented, which is to say, O or Ø. 

When it comes to the ontologically higher domains, our sciences -- as presently conceived -- may actually be losing half of the picture (Smith).

Monism is an attitude that violates half of the experience.

Noted.

Now, creativity is another quintessential example of vertical causation. As we've said before, the very first thing we know about God is that he creates. Indeed, it is not only on page one of the Bible, but the very first sentence. Dennis Prager even says it is the most important verse of the Bible, and why not? 

While many Torah verses influenced history, Genesis 1:1 changed history in monumental ways.

Example?

Prager lists seven, but one is enough:

If there is no Creator, there is no ultimate purpose to existence, including, of course, human existence. We humans can make up a meaning because we are the one species that cannot live without meaning. But the fact remains that we made it up.

The human has the insignificance of a swarm of insects when it is merely human.

Noted.

Above we alluded to the great cosmic circle which expands as we approach Celestial Central. Conversely, Smith describes how the "truncated cosmos, as conceived in contemporary cosmology, has actually shrunk." 

This is ironic, because the so-called "expanding universe" is actually infinitely smaller than the traditional one with infinitude at the center (and reflected in man). 

The distances of the physical universe are those of a prison.

Noted.

Despite the official bluster, the fact remains that, compared to the integral cosmos contemplated by the wise, that "brave new universe" amounts to little more than a speck of dust. 

Supposedly measuring billions of light-years, it is in truth too indigent to be envisioned at all: to do so one needs first to embellish that postulated universe with attributes it is actually unable to possess (Smith).  

"The least insight that one can obtain into sublime things is more desirable than the most certain knowledge of lower things" (Thomas).

Noted.

By the way, I wouldn't exactly call this post a train wreck, rather, a case of the train ascending a fog-enshrouded mountain.