Multisense Realism

“To the ancient Brahman, to the ancient Hindu scholar, space was first of all a totality, a unity. It was not an absolute diffusion going on forever and ever, it was a totality without boundaries, as far as we can conceive boundaries. It was an all-ness that was also a one-ness.”

“There is somewhere out there a point or a condition in which the conceivable fades into the inconceivable. The knowable into the unknowable, that which has an existence in time retires into an eternity, and in this great collective concept of ultimates, ancient man established his definition of space. Space was ultimate. Space was unconditioned for it preceded condition.”

“Every part of itself full of light, every part of itself germinal and seminal, […] it is a completely rich, inconceivable kind of earth, an invisible earth in which everything grows, and everything has its taproots in space. From this one eternal condition, all other conditions must come. Thus this uncondition cannot be vacuum, cannot either be continuum as we know it, it must be total fullness. Space must be the most complete of all things. There can be no lack anywhere within it. There can be no lack anywhere within it. No strange bubbles in which it itself is empty.”

“These spaces are not emptiness, they are bridges of fullness, binding things together. Space also contains within itself the roots of binding and loosing. It does act as an eternal agent of binding. Nothing can escape from it, and in some way, beneath its invisible and apparently completely flexible azonic constitution, there is something that is fixed, something that is firm beyond all firmness, strong beyond strength, enduring beyond endurance. Thus space carries within it foundation, place, and in its own mysterious way, moving upon itself, it engenders time. For time is an unfolding, and moving of duration in space.”

Audio: Manly P. Hall – Astro-Theology- ( All 5 Parts in FULL)

Interesting how closely this description comes in some parts to quantum mechanical ideas of vacuum flux. In my view, these ideas are projected outward into a public realism (which is mentioned directly above as place, firmament, and spacetime) whereas a more accurate model would locate public realism within the sense that matter has of itself. Sense is the firmament, and the great orientation principle which binds not only matter within itself, but separates the focus in one experience from another.

My view locates time as a function of private recollection and expectation, not of a public unfolding. Ours is the sense which reads movement and disposition of sequence out of successive exposures of positions. The capacity to compare and discern, on a sub-personal level of perception, is what gives rise to the intelligibility of form and consequence on a personal level that can be recorded symbolically as time.

Space is indeed what anchors us to public communication between participants on all of the different levels of scale, from microcosm to the astrophysical, but not through the fullness of a magical plenum of space. The fullness is within matter, or rather, matter is the obstacle of the fullness of experience, and space is the absence of low level (microcosmic) connection of matter.

In a way, space can be imagined to be the monadic fullness just as well, since it is through the divisions among bodies that all experience coheres and disperses, but that is more of a second-order logical abstraction to me. The thesis is presence, the antithesis is absence, the synthesis is realism. Realism is matter, the re-presentation of presence across a gap. A gap, or space, is the attenuation of detectability, a rationing or diffracting of presence so that unity is preserved in some modality and severed in others. Space is information entropy – a threshold beyond which tactile, private unity gives way to tangible public contact and visibility.