folder 53 - 013

OverviewTranscribeVersions

Facsimile

Transcription

53 page 013

C-1

Regarding coaxiality, there could be no other explanation than structure, but up to now I could not account for there being two coaxial structures. Why two? + why do we see only one of the two? The "long extinct cosmos + it's still there" explains it; there is in fact only one structure -cosmos- + we see it not. Instead of structure A versus structure B it is world-order versus cosmos. The latter being structure, the former not; so to see cosmos is to see structure per se - + this is a fortiori a matter of intelligible seeing (as in "seeing"). (Understanding: a high order act of the rational faculty, of cognitive, which carries me right back to the meta-abstraction + my identifying it as an extraordinary high-order kind of reasoning. Now it is clear why this meta-abstraction was non-verbal -not ratiocination- + why it took place in an instant: it was right-hemisphere pattern -Gestalt- comprehension: spatial, so to speak; vast pattern in total reality that added up to a different world, but utilizing -as I like to put it, "working off of" - the same constituents (therefore not only is the pattern itself extracted but there is of necessity an awareness of constituents common to both worlds, +, as I explicated all this last February, the reasoning yields up very strange verbal concepts, specifically that one + the same object can "be" twice, i.e. at two times + two places - although "time" + "place" as concepts must be severely redefined.
If you had been raised in a civilization that unquestioningly held the discontinuous matter view of reality, + you suddenly saw -or "saw"- cosmos -which I say must of necessity be predicated on the continuum view- the experience would simply unhinge you because cosmos -in the true sense- is impossible in the discontinuous matter world. Two realizations are involved, then: (1) what you

Page Notes

Nobody has written a note for this page yet

Please sign in to write a note for this page