When the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge was eaten, the knowledge of God descended into images, which make up this world of form. Acquiring knowledge through the faculty of the intellect occurs through its capacity for comparative-discernment by means of perception. That is, by comparing the images of this world (their interaction, their contrasting yet mutual behavior, the movement of form from the minutest level to the greatest, noticing pattern and developing theorems to predict, etc.) through observation, discernment may take place, and through discernment, meaning may be apprehended. And thus the world is an instrument of knowledge for those who possess this capacity of discernment whereby which meaning may be derived; meaning, however, pertains to spiritual intuition. But for those without it, the world of form is absolutely confounding, perplexing, and confusing such that there is no deeper meaning.
The Mixed Life – The Material World
Socrates called our existence here in the material world the mixed life. The mixed life is the third category of existence that he highlights in his dialogue with Protarchus on uncovering The Chief Good. It is the generated compound of the first category, the infinite world after it is held down by the finite world, which is the second category. Abstractions held within the first category of the Platonic Realm of Ideas are infinite in nature, but when given physicality in this world, are finite.
According to Socrates, the concept of “big” and “small”, for instance, are infinite in nature, and thus he calls them “bigger” and “smaller” as they are without limit. They exist only in relation to each other and thus extend infinitely away from each other in opposite directions. They are abstract references, they are not static, and thus cannot be envisioned or pinpointed by the mind’s eye. They are seen by the intellect only through the concretization of the abstract here in the physical world. The concretization of the abstract represents the particularization of the universal in this mixed life by means of comparison of two finite objects. This comparison reveals one object as “big” in relation to the other that is “small” at a precise moment in time; it is as if the infinitely opposite abstraction of “bigger” and “smaller”, which cannot be captured by the mind, are frozen in time and revealed by means of comparison of two objects; that is, it is through comparison of two physical objects that we may discern the concept of “big” and “small”. The concept of “big” and “small” are not inherent qualities of the physical objects themselves, rather, they are judgments made by the mind through perceptive discernment.
In other words, these two concepts exist in relation to each other, but can only be discerned by the intellect through perception whereby which comparison is made. Because they exist in relation to each other, and thus are mutually definitional, were you to remove from existence one object, the remaining object could neither be said to be “big” nor “small”. This world, as a finite realm, is able to reveal to the intellect, in time, the infinite through the mind’s capacity for discernment by means of comparison through which it may make a judgement. And it is this capacity for judgement that lies at the Heart of the soul’s journey.
Extrapolating from this Principle of knowledge, we come to understand the spiritual view of the nature of this world, which is as meaning set up in images. Through observation of the images of this world and discerning meaning, we may acquire deeper knowledge of God. The world is an instrument of knowledge, for instance, according to traditional spiritual Islamic thought.
The Discernment of the Divine
And so, the attempt to know God by the intellect, according to Adi Shankara, represents the downfall of Atman, the Supreme Spirit, into the grand illusion. The intellect knows by means of discernment, and discernment occurs by means of comparison. And so to know God by the intellect is to attempt to discern God by means of comparison. Just as the abstract concept of “bigger” and “smaller” that exist in relation to each other are revealed by means of concretized representations, or images, what we refer to as the Divine, in its infiniteness and transcendence, is revealed in an infinite variety of images that make up the universe, both in its movement and its stillness. It is said that the Divine Attributes give rise to and are expressed through form, and the universe is a symphony of the interaction of Divine Attributes. That by observing this symphony, we may discern God. But it is not mere discursive discernment, it is rather a more fundamental discernment, what is called intuitive discernment. Through intuitive discernment, there is an expansive and revelatory experience of Beauty. And through this experience of Beauty, there is certainty, there is knowledge, there is value and meaning, and there is Truth. The intellect is completely bewildered by the infinite variety of Divine Expressions, but depending on whether it discerns or becomes distracted by the lights of the world, the intellect resides in a state of awareness and knowledge or unconsciousness and ignorance. And once it falls into a state of ignorance, and its intuitive faculty has been closed, then existential isolation sets in. So then, rather than the universe being a diverse representation of Divine Unity, it becomes like a shattered mirror that represents a fractured existence that is totally random and chaotic.
The sense of a random and chaotic universe is born from a deep fixation on the lights of the material world. When the Unitary Principle of God is lost, then the mind falls into a state multiplicity, for God can never be divided, can never be compared, can never be discerned, can never be known by means of the intellect. And thus the intellect has merely divided itself, becoming fractured and fragmented, like a broken mirror that lays shattered on the floor. The Mind descends into fabricated illusion, the realm of multiplicity. The mixed life, the material world, transitions from a place by which the expressions of God reveal God by means of discernment to a place of randomness and purposelessness, which eschews the Unifying Principle of God.
The Intellect and Spiritual Hubris
This attempt to analyze God, to discern God, to divide God, to compare God, and the effect of this attempt, is the metaphysical reality of hubris. It denotes an utter contradiction to the nature of Truth, and thus represents a profound aggregiance against nature that results in a total metaphysical inversion or descent. Where the nature of reality is that of Unity, this attempt represents the Principle of Duality. From duality, there arises multiplicity, and from multiplicity there is separation.
The words to describe reality become increasingly anthropomorphic as they relate to the consciousness and perception of man. From separation there is isolation, and from isolation there is aloneness. From aloneness there is abandonment and a sense of being forsaken. From this sense of being forsaken there is fear, and from fear there is resentment. From this resentment there is hatred, and from hatred there arises the systems of devaluation and oppression, both of one’s own soul as well as that of others.
But hubris as a word and as a concept merely emanates from this inverted reality. It is a mere shadow of the attempt to analyze God and describe its catastrophic energy that permeates us. However, we see the effects of this in our lives and in the world, and this is because the attributes that reside within us on the metaphysical dimension of Being are known in this world by their effects. When there is hubris in our Heart, then it is the sign of a Heart that cannot intuit the presence of God. And unable to intuit the presence of God within oneself, one is unable to intuit the presence of God within others. This intuiting of the Divine Presence pertains to intuiting consciousness in others, and there are varying degrees to this. So when we think about systems of oppression, we are thinking about systems that devalue and dehumanize us in relation to others, or others in relation to us.
Reference(s)
