Godheval

Every conscious being is like an “eye of god, vision imperfect, a lens which provides one possible interpretation of existence. Even if an eye were to have perfect vision it requires or is at least improved through balance with a second eye. And certainly it can be said that multiple pairs of eyes allow for a better understanding of phenomena than one pair. So no one eye of god sees the entire truth but a distorted or incomplete picture.

Worse still, some eyes are blind, relying on the eyes of others to relay the picture to them. This sort of blind following requires unconditional trust in the leader without suspicion of that leader having its own agenda. But surely if a blind man had a choice, he would choose to see for himself instead of being led. But unlike the blind man, every eye of god does have this choice, whether to rely merely on another’s depiction of reality or on direct experience.

Our inquiries into the nature of reality are propagations of god’s original crisis of consciousness – the burning question of “what am I?”, followed by questions of “what are these things that are not me?”, which lead to our attempts at understanding the external world. But just as we cannot count exclusively on our eyes to create a full picture of reality – rather only a superficial one – so must god come to regain the innate understanding of itself, to close the eyes to external experience in favor of inner revelation. And if we conscious beings are all eyes of god, then we are all a part of god, and the inner experience into which we withdraw must be the same – a perennial truth that is not merely a perception of the absolute, but that is the absolute itself.