Charges, Spirit, Cosms

I had second hand smoke in my shirt and sinuses last night, and I find myself trying to sneeze it out. It’s been a windy weekend, leading to a cold week next week.

Last night, as we left [a small po’dunk town], I had the chance to look at the constellations above for a few moments. It was glorious, even over to the Pleiades.

I felt tired last night, so I most[ly] tried to sleep.

I feel the attention is easier with a charge of Luin, but I know there’s energy paradigm going on there, and CC would say much the same about energy and attention. Tapping into TTL and faerie—well, the ___ is there, and it feels different than TTL, but I do wonder how much TTG and TTL are personal experientialities, internal soulscapes (spiritscapes)—

—I don’t like “soul.” Soul implies indivisibility, and concretization. “Soul” has been mangled and commodified by the Abrahamics. Spirit is malleable. Spirit is less this precious gem and more our spread and field. Soul is an idiot child that old men collect and protect. Spirit is your breath and experience.

But T’TL and T’TG may be personal spiritscapes—I think Buddhism and Tantrism address such things[1], though I think they reflect potentially shareable spaces—hah, microcosmic vs. macrocosmic thinking is helpful here. I access my internal microcosmic reflections of broader realities, but vice versa can also happen. Indeed, my finding of paths and passages may be predicated on reconnecting my micros to the macros again. (After all, I try to take Elethis inside me as well as outside—but also I see how in Phonogram music and music cultural narratives provide those microcosmic spiritscapes, and the fictional worlds we internalize provide us with our powers and selves.)

That’s how cultural indoctrination works—we internalize the consensus and its paradigm where we should fashion our own. CM mistakes cultural appropriation and slight of mind, but CM shows we can do our own, not just cabala, GD, consensus, Xianity, etc.

However, it’s not just mapping one’s internal worlds but also one’s own narrative, backplot, logic, and what reality and realities are out there—you have to shape your external world into the microcosm. The fey, at least the bright ones, admit most nearly anything into accessibility and potentiality and virtuality/reality. The result is that we inhabit a multiverse rather than a single realm, and we admit the existence of demons, gods, angels, dragons, aliens, UTs, obviously fey, and more—a host of as many potentialities, magics, technology, and more.

This, though, is the narrative shaping, “redefining yourself,” establishing the microcosm to whatever macrocosm you’re working with. This also concerns how you bridge micro and macro—the GD did it through the “rays of light,” viewed it as a compartmentalized process but allowed themselves a means for accessing the greater external reality. (And developing that weird crystal sphere, crystal globe view of self was—well—a very literalist approach. Cf. Thorn’s bubbleship of the imagination.)

[1] Don’t worry, true believers: I find the word I’m looking for here in a bit.

Image: Hubble Ultra Deep Field (via, y’know, NASA)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *