The Circle of Existence: Chapter 5 – Casting Shadows

Creative Commons License

by DCH Park

By User:Nino Barbieri (Own work) [CC BY-SA 2.5 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5)], via Wikimedia Commons

By User:Nino Barbieri (Own work) [CC BY-SA 2.5 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5)], via Wikimedia Commons

“The beginnings and ends of shadow lie between the light and darkness and may be infinitely diminished and infinitely increased. Shadow is the means by which bodies display their form. The forms of bodies could not be understood in detail but for shadow.”
– Leonardo da Vinci

“Character is like a tree and reputation like a shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing.”
– Abraham Lincoln

“Poetry is an echo, asking a shadow to dance.”
– Carl Sandburg

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
– Mahatma Gandhi

Imagine an irregular object floating in space. Light shines down on it, casting a shadow on the floor below. The shadow is a perfect projection of the widest parts of the object even though those widest parts may not be in the same plane.

All you have is the shadow but you are really interested in the object itself. It is easy to see that the shape and behavior of the shadow are determined by the object but going the other way and understanding the nature of the object from nothing more than its shadow can be very hard and in some cases, impossible. For example, a sphere and a cone can both project a circle shadow. There are many other shapes that can project the same shadow, some of which are highly irregular. But if you are reasoning back to the object when all you know is that it projects a circle shadow, the object itself cannot be uniquely determined.

Movement and change in the shadow make understanding the object easier but very simple and straightforward behavior of the object can produce complicated and bizarre behavior in the shadow. Elaborate rules may have to be invented to explain the behavior of the shadow if that’s all you see, whereas no such rules would be needed if the shadow is understood as a projection of the object. Life becomes simpler when behavior of the shadow is understood in terms of behavior of the object.

The truth casts “shadows” into the physical Universe in the same way that a three dimensional object casts shadows onto a plane. Very different shadows can all be cast by the same object just as the same truth can present differently at different times and from different angles. Understanding the truth from nothing more than what it casts into physical reality is like trying to reconstruct an object from nothing more than its shadows – it is not impossible but it can be very hard and it can be very easy to go down a blind alley and not know it.

However, all of the shadows are cast by the same object. Therefore they must all be consistent with each other. In a similar manner, the shadows of truth that we find in the physical Universe are all consistent with each other. Also, the things that are not true – the apparitions cast by things other than the truth – are inconsistent with the truth. With two objects casting shadows, the shadows may appear consistent some of the time but they are from two different things and their apparent consistency will break down sooner or later. In the same way, the apparent consistency between shadows of true things and shadows of untrue things will break down sooner or later (please see also Chapter 13: Consistency).

This is why it is so important to use every sense you have in your body – even senses that go beyond the traditional five. We can’t afford to ignore any clue in working from the physical shadow back to the truth. The clues can be so subtle that it is easy to mistake some or miss them altogether. Who knows which clue might make a critical difference? Yet this is done. Clues are ignored, most frequently to honor or continue to hold old ideas even (some would say “especially”) in the face of clues that point in a different direction.

How is this done? Sometimes a clue’s champion is vilified, ridiculed, or otherwise tainted so that the clue itself is never taken seriously. Alternatively, the clue can be simply ignored. Subtle clue(s) are easily and often ignored. A clue’s subtlety does not mean that it is wrong or doesn’t exist. Nevertheless, history shows that such ignorance is common. In fact, evidence that seems to contradict the common “wisdom” or the established order is frequently ignored, especially by the “powers that be” and those motivated out of a perception of lack – that in order to increase wealth, safety, whatever, it must be taken from someone else. (There is more than enough wealth, safety, food, joy, health, etc. in the Universe for everyone’s needs. We don’t have to take anything from anyone else to have enough for ourselves. In fact, we have more of it when we help others to receive it. Ironically, by denying those things to other people, the size of the whole pie gets smaller, even if the piece we carve out for ourselves is bigger in the next round. Eventually, the pie will shrink to the point where there won’t be enough for everybody.)

Another trick that has been used many times throughout history is to confound two or more otherwise inconsistent things. The basic tactic is to present one thing every time another thing comes up so you learn to associate one thing with the other. The only relationship between them is the forced one but people tend to forget that fact and come to associate one thing with the other habitually. It may sound silly but after a while the two things may come to be so closely associated in people’s minds that they have trouble even conceiving of them as separate entities any longer. (One example of this is found in the attitudes some people had toward women working outside of the home. Some people believed that women were delicate creatures and were not well suited to do “unsightly” or complex jobs, such as police work or management. Such attitudes are rare in the U.S. today but they were common here not too long ago.)

Nevertheless, the essential observation – that a habitual bond is formed between different ideas that have nothing to do with each other – is sound. The end result is a belief that the two ideas are an inseparable unit. In practice, one idea is often true and the confounded idea is often untrue. In order to honor the truth, you must first recognize the truth as separate from its confounded idea. You must separate them again.

A more subtle tactic, albeit one that seems to be more common these days, is distraction combined with a default. As the pace of life increases, people become busier and busier just trying to survive. As their time and energy are more and more consumed, they have less and less to devote to healing, silence, and joy. Consequently, they believe that they have to accept the existing default in order to survive, in order to keep up. (Who forces them and why and how are good questions.)

People don’t typically devote time or energy to considering what they accept. They simply accept what is given and move on. This acceptance is currently encouraged in society, ostensibly for the sake of alacrity, but the fact is that simply accepting something (for any reason) does not mean that the choice made is the best choice nor that the range from which it was chosen even reflects the full range of possible choices. It may only reflect what was done before or a way of thinking that is common or something else, but that doesn’t make it any more right. (A powerful result from Organization Theory is that choosing the set of things that someone else will choose from is one way to exercise power. Please also see the note in “Chapter 25: Freedom.”)

When ignorance isn’t enough, some folks resort to violently enforcing the established point of view. It can be an act of defiance to recognize and honor the truth. Many of those who argue for the status quo are wont to conjure images of violence, chaos, and death as the certain outcomes of changing things. They seem to argue that the only alternative to the status quo is chaos and a complete lack of order. But a change in the order is not lack of order. It is interesting that the same people who decry change because of violence are often the first ones to resort to exactly the same violence they decry.

All of this can be rather confusing. What is truth and what is untruth? Where/how is one commonly associated with the other? Is that link between them real? Whom does that link benefit? Whom does that link damage? You are best served to trust yourself and really observe for yourself what is there. Find the truth-nuggets in what is said, no matter who is saying it. What is important is what is said, not who is saying it.

When things seem confusing, it is usually because part of the puzzle is misunderstood or yet to be revealed. Confusion makes confounding things easier but there is always a mismatch or giveaway. This is why it is so important to be aware of all of your senses and what they are telling you. Anything that seems to be inconsistent or that leads to complications bears further consideration. There may be other things going on besides the truth but if there are, the inconsistencies are always there to be seen.

There may be some people who try to gain advantage by hiding a part of the puzzle, seeking to use the truth only for themselves and their chosen few. They seem to prefer to “rule in hell” instead of recognizing other people as equals. They would rather be top of the heap of a very small ant hill than equal members in a community that raises itself to the stars. My sense is that this attitude also comes from an incomplete or inaccurate picture. As these inaccuracies are revealed and healed, such attitudes are naturally diminished. The natural result is an evolution toward a community of equals.

This community of equals is what most creative scientists and artists imagine for everyone. They are concerned with discovering and elucidating the truth, whatever it may be and wherever they may find it. How we organize ourselves – the economic and social implications of that truth – is taken by them to be a consequence of the truth. It falls out of the truth. It doesn’t direct it or determine its course. It certainly doesn’t limit the truth. And you find the truth by looking for consistencies between shadows.

###

More of the book, The Circle of Existence can be found at www.smashwords.com.

© 2015, David Park. All Rights Reserved.

Creative Commons License
”The Circle of Existence: Chapter 5 – Casting Shadows” by DCH Park is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Flattr this!

Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed