FOUR (4) DIMENSIONS OF SPACE
Erle Frayne D. Argonza
Gracious day to all ye
seekers and Aspirants to the Path!
For this particular note,
the focus will be on the subject of 4-dimensional space. Let it be echoed that
the mahatmas of the spiritual Brotherhood have already shared to us the core
knowledge about space some couples of decades before Albert Einstein theorized
about the Special Theory of Relativity which is premised precisely on a
4-dimensional space.
Space is distinct from the
term ‘reality’, in that space has been 4-dimensional from the very inception
whereas reality has been subdivided into seven (7) planes or dimensions from
the beginnings yet of the emanation of the elements, worlds and sentient beings
by the Almighty One I Am That I Am. This note continues on the reflections
derived from Sloka 5 of the Book of Dzyan concerning the formation of man ‘the
thinker’.
HPBlavatsky, who was
mandated by spiritual Brotherhood to release Divine Wisdom to mankind, this
being the new policy to share the Wisdom openly to all men and women,
articulated more on the subject of space in Volume I, Secret Doctrine, as follows:
The Second Round brought forth and developed two Elements—Fire and
Earth—and its humanity, adapted to this condition of Nature, if we can
give the name Humanity to beings living under conditions unknown to men, was—to
use again a familiar phrase in a strictly figurative sense (the only way in
which it can be used correctly)—“a two-dimensional species.” The
processes of natural development which we are now considering will at once
elucidate and discredit the fashion of speculating on the attributes of the two,
three, and four or more “dimensional Space;” but in passing, it
is worth while to point out the real significance of the sound but incomplete
intuition that has prompted—among Spiritualists and Theosophists, and several
great men of Science, for the matter of that*—the use of the modern expression. “the fourth dimension of Space.”
To begin with, of course, the superficial absurdity of assuming that Space
itself is measurable in any direction is of little consequence. The familiar phrase can only be an
abbreviation of the fuller form—the “Fourth dimension of MATTER in
Space.Ӡ But it is an unhappy phrase even thus expanded, because while
it is perfectly true that the progress of evolution may be destined to
introduce us to new characteristics of matter, those with which we are already
familiar are really more numerous than the three dimensions. The faculties, or what is perhaps the best
available term, the characteristics of matter, must clearly bear a direct
relation always to the senses of man.
Matter has extension, colour, motion (molecular motion), taste, and
smell, corresponding to the existing senses of man, and by the time that it
fully develops the next characteristic—let us call it for the moment
PERMEABILITY—this will correspond to the next sense of man—let us call it
“NORMAL CLAIRVOYANCE;” thus, when some bold thinkers have been thirsting for a
fourth dimension to explain the passage of matter through matter, and the
production of knots upon an endless cord, what they were really in want of, was
a sixth characteristic of matter.
The three dimensions belong really but to one attribute or
characteristic of matter—extension; and popular common sense justly rebels
against the idea that under any condition of things there can be more than
three of such dimensions as length, breadth, and thickness. These terms, and the term “dimension”
itself, all belong to one plane of thought, to one stage of evolution, to one
characteristic of matter. So long
as there are foot-rules within the resources of Kosmos, to apply to matter, so
long will they be able to measure it three ways and no more; and from the time
the idea of measurement first occupied a place in the human understanding, it
has been possible to apply measurement in three directions and no more. But these considerations do not militate
in any way against the certainty that in the progress of time—as the faculties
of humanity are multiplied—so will the characteristics of matter be multiplied
also. Meanwhile, the expression
is far more incorrect than even the familiar one of the “Sun rising or setting.”
We now return to the consideration of material
evolution through the Rounds. Matter
in the second Round, it has been stated, may be figuratively referred to
as two-dimensional. But here another caveat must be entered. That loose and figurative expression may
be regarded—in one plane of thought, as we have just seen—as equivalent to the
second characteristic of matter corresponding to the second perceptive faculty
or sense of man. But these two
linked scales of evolution are concerned with the processes going on within the
limits of a single Round. The
succession of primary aspects of Nature with which the succession of Rounds is
concerned, has to do, as already indicated, with the development of the
“Elements” (in the Occult sense)—Fire, Air, Water,* Earth. We are only in the fourth Round, and our
catalogue so far stops short. The
centres of consciousness (destined to develop into humanity as we know it) of
the third Round arrived at a perception of the third Element Water.†
Those of the fourth Round have added earth as a state of matter to their
stock as well as the three other elements in their present transformation. In short, none of the so-called elements
were, in the three preceding Rounds, as they are now. For all we know, FIRE may have been pure
AKASA, the first Matter of the Magnum Opus of the Creators and
“Builders,” that Astral Light which the paradoxical Eliphas Lévi calls in one
breath “the body of the Holy Ghost,” and in the next “Baphomet,” the “Androgyne
Goat of Mendes”*; AIR, simply Nitrogen, “the breath of the Supporters of the
Heavenly Dome,” as the Mahometan mystics call it; WATER, that primordial fluid
which was required, according to Moses, to make a living soul with. And this may account for the flagrant
discrepancies and unscientific statements found in Genesis. Separate the first from the second chapter;
read the former as a scripture of the Elohists, and the latter as that of the
far younger Jehovists; still one finds, if one reads between the lines, the
same order in which things created appear—namely, Fire (light), Air, Water, and
MAN (or the Earth). For the
sentence: “In the beginning God
created Heaven and Earth” is a mistranslation; it is not “Heaven and Earth,”
but the duplex or dual Heaven, the upper and the lower
Heavens, or the separation of primordial substance that was light in its upper
and dark in its lower portions—or the manifested Universe—in its duality of the
invisible (to the senses) and the visible to our perceptions. God divided the light from the Darkness
(v. 4); and then made the firmament, air (5), “a firmament in the midst
of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters,” (6), i.e.,
“the waters which were under the firmament (our manifested visible Universe)
from the waters above the firmament,” or the (to us) invisible planes of
being. In the second chapter (the
Jehovistic), plants and herbs are created before water, just as in the first, light
is produced before the Sun. “God
made the Earth and the Heavens and every plant of the field before it was in
the Earth and every herb of the field before it grew; for the Elohim
(‘gods’) had not caused it to rain upon the earth, etc.” (v.
5)—an absurdity unless the esoteric explanation is accepted. The plants were created before
they were in the earth—for there was no earth then such as it is now;
and the herb of the field was in existence before it grew as it does now in the
fourth Round.
Discussing
and explaining the nature of the invisible Elements and the “primordial fire”
mentioned above, Eliphas Lévi calls it invariably the “Astral Light.” It
is the “grand Agent Magique” with him; undeniably it is so, but—only so far as Black
Magic is concerned, and on the lowest planes of what we call Ether, the
noumenon of which is Akâsa; and even this would be held incorrect by orthodox
Occultists. The “Astral Light” is
simply the older “sidereal Light” of Paracelsus; and to say that
“everything which exists has been evolved from it, and it preserves and
reproduces all forms,” as he writes, is to enunciate truth only in the second
proposition. The first is
erroneous; for if all that exists was evolved through (or via )
it, it is not the astral light. The
latter is not the container of all things but only the reflector, at
best, of this all. Eliphas Lévi writes:—
“The great Magic agent is the fourth emanation of
the life principle(we say—it is the first in the inner, and the second in the
outer (our) Universe), of which the Sun is the third form. . . for the daystar (the sun) is only the
reflection and material shadow of the Central Sun of truth, which illuminates
the intellectual (invisible) world of Spirit and which itself is but a gleam
borrowed from the ABSOLUTE.”
So far he is right enough. But
when the great authority of the Western Kabalists adds that nevertheless, “it
is not the immortal Spirit as the Indian Hierophants have imagined”—we answer
that he slanders the said Hierophants, as they have said nothing of the kind;
while even the Purânic exoteric writings flatly contradict the assertion. No Hindu has ever mistaken Prakriti—the
Astral Light being only above the lowest plane of Prakriti, the material
Kosmos—for the “immortal Spirit.” Prakriti is ever called Maya,
illusion, and is doomed to disappear with the rest, the gods included, at the
hour of the Pralaya; for it is shown that Akâsa is not even the Ether, least of
all then, we imagine, can it be the Astral Light. Those unable to penetrate beyond the dead
letter of the Purânas, have occasionally confused Akâsa with Prakriti, with
Ether, and even with the visible Sky! It is true also that those who have
invariably translated the term Akâsa by “Ether” (Wilson, for instance), finding it called “the
material cause of sound” possessing, moreover, this one single property
(Vishnu Purâna), have ignorantly imagined it to be “material,” in the physical
sense. True, again, that if the
characteristics are accepted literally, then, since nothing material or
physical, and therefore conditioned and temporary can be immortal—according to
metaphysics and philosophy—it would follow that Akâsa is neither infinite nor
immortal. But all this is erroneous, since both the words Pradhâna (primeval
matter) and sound, as a property, have been misunderstood; the former
term (Pradhâna) being certainly synonymous with Mulaprakriti and Akâsa,
and the latter (sound) with the Verbum, the Word or the Logos. This is easy to demonstrate; for it is
shown in the following sentences in Vishnu Purâna: “In the beginning there was neither day
nor night, nor sky, nor earth, nor darkness, nor light. . . . . Save
only ONE, unapprehensible by intellect, or that which is Brahma and Pums
(Spirit) and Pradhâna (primordial matter).” . . . . (Book
I., ch. ii.).
Now, what is Pradhâna, if it is not Mulaprakriti,
the root of all, in another aspect? For
Pradhâna, though said further on to merge into the Deity as everything else
does, in order to leave the ONE absolute during the Pralaya, yet is held as
infinite and immortal. The Commentator describes the Deity as: “One Pradhánika Brahma Spirit: THAT, was,” and interprets the compound
term as a substantive, not as a derivative word used attributively, i.e.,
like something conjoined with Pradhâna.* Hence Pradhâna even in the
Purânas is an aspect of Parabrahmam, not an evolution, and must be the same as
the Vedantic Mulaprakriti. “Prakriti in its primary state is
Akâsa,” says a Vedantin scholar (see “Five Years of Theosophy,” p. 169). It is almost abstract Nature.
Akâsa, then, is
Pradhâna in another form, and as such cannot be Ether, the ever-invisible
agent, courted even by physical Science.
Nor is it Astral Light. It
is, as said, the noumenon of the seven-fold differentiated Prakriti†—the
ever immaculate “Mother” of the fatherless Son, who becomes “Father” on
the lower manifested plane. For
MAHAT is the first product of Pradhâna, or Akâsa, and Mahat—Universal
intelligence “whose characteristic property is Buddhi”—is no other than
the Logos, for he is called “Eswara” Brahmâ, Bhâva, etc. (See Linga Purâna, sec. lxx.
12 et seq.; and Vâyu Purâna, but especially the former
Purâna—prior, section viii., 67-74).
He is, in short, the “Creator” or the divine mind in creative
operation, “the cause of all things.” …
[Philippines,
19 May 2012]
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
ARGONZA COSMIC BLOGS & LINKS:
http://erlefraynebrightworld.wordpress.com,
http://cosmicbuhay.blogspot.com,
http://kathapantas.blogdrive.com,
http://talangguro.blogfree.com, http://tribes.tribe.com, http://lovingenergies.spruz.com,
http://www.newciv.org, http://thatsthewayoflight.socialparadox.com,
http://lightworkers.org, http://www.spiritualpassions.com, http://www.articlesforfree.net
MASTERS’ SITES:
