The point is this: I interpret the three worlds as being
1. The surface world of phenomenal reality which you can
reach out and touch.
2. The word beneath the surface, evidence of which you might
sometimes see, but exploration of which would mean learning the required skills to dive
to unknown depths.
3. The world above the surface, which you can only
occasionally glimpse in reflection because you don’t yet know how to lift your
head up.
I don’t make the slightest claim that such interpretation is
definitive, not even to me. It’s just an interpretation based on one of my favourite notions as to what reality might be about. I don’t know what Escher intended,
and I don’t want to know because I don’t want to be directed or even coaxed
into any prescribed view of things. It’s why I don’t read books by gurus any
more.
And if I get around to making another post later, I promise
to try and make it a damn sight less serious than this one. Being serious is
too much trouble these days, except when I’m bored.
No comments:
Post a Comment