2D Geometries

I’m occasionally asked what makes “sacred geometry” sacred. A short answer I often give is something like: “Either everything is sacred, or nothing is sacred, depending on one’s perspective.”

From the perspective of the all-encompassing, inclusive non-dual Identity that we all share that transcends the personal, we’re all one in the same essence: our eternal transpersonal nature embraces and encompasses all creation and is a reflection of Perfect Oneness, the sacred unchanging innocence of the changeless, timeless, spaceless, formless Unity. Non-duality is a term that attempts to convey the idea of this sacred reality, which transcends ideas, words, and symbols. However, ideas, words, and symbols can, at best, be properly understood – merely reflect some aspects of the quintessential experience of our steadfast source.

It is only when we harbor nightmarish grievances against parts of our Self that seem split off and separate – the profane belief we could be apart from ourselves, each other and our Creator – that we seem to exist in a state of perpetual war, or at least a less than peaceful ceasefire amid the challenges of an uncertain, lonely and fearful world. The world of duality, conflict, polarization, contrast and differences is our default experience in this world, making it seem like the only alternative, yet there is a part of our mind – however deeply buried – that remains connected to Source, an abiding awareness that remembers our inseparability from the eternal perfection of creation, despite our challenge to awaken that possibility, let alone make that our every day experience.

As the Greek philosopher Plato taught, there is a deeper reality beyond the forms that appear to us in the material world. Elsewhere on this website, there are numerous references to the five regular polyhedra credited to Plato called the Platonic Solids, building blocks of three-dimensional geometry and primary to countless forms in our space-time dimensional world. Plato suggested that these 3D geometric symbols represented five elements: tetrahedron (fire), hexahedron or cube (earth), octahedron (air), icosahedron (water), and dodecahedron (ether or spirit).

Plato also was credited with inexorably leading his students back to the un-manifest realm of mind (source) rather than become muddled and confused by the seemingly endless variations and permutations of form (symbol) and his upward pointing finger in the “School of Athens” painting reminds us that understanding begins with returning our mind to cause (source) rather than obsessing over effect (symbol.) The “back to top” symbol on this website is the zoomed-in hand of Plato pointing up, reminding us to get “above the battleground” of duality before trying to contemplate or comprehend the paradoxes of our dualistic world.

That vertical orientation of Plato’s upward-pointed finger symbolizes the inevitable (and joyous) return to oneness. It represents the undoing of the fragmentation of dualistic thinking expressed in our lives as “we/they” and “us vs. them” polarizations, as well as the myriad forms in which we compare two or more things for the purpose of maintaining our belief in separation. One can look at anything in the world in terms of intrinsic oneness, with duality or multiplicity being merely an “optical delusion of consciousness” as Albert Einstein put it; in that state of mind, everything becomes an opportunity to heal our minds of warring interests and perspectives as we forgive ourselves for investing in interpretations that are merely silly mistakes and amusing errors, easily correctible from the proper vantage point … above the world of dividing symbols.

Plato is also famous for his Allegory of the Cave, which draws one’s attention to the metaphysical symbolism of light and shadow. The reality we don’t see in our imprisoned mental state – where we are fascinated by a world of sensory and material distractions, diversions, and deceptions – is the light of day that casts shadows on the wall of the metaphoric cave of mindlessness. We’re identified with shadows (symbols) instead of the greater reality of the shared light that is our common identity (source) and we’re so inured and adjusted to this extremely deficient (mis)perception that we don’t want to be reminded that there is a real alternative to our dark and dismal self-imposed prison in the labyrinthine cavernous abyss of duality.

We could look at any number of geometric forms for examples of these two perspectives – two completely mutually exclusive thought systems – that reflect our journey back to source using symbol as a starting point, and returning us to our shared essence as the ultimate destination.

“… the destination is at the source.” – Michael Hedges, Road to Return (Lyrics)

The graphic below symbolizes two identical circles in five arbitrary stages of “returning to source” (unity) from our perception of duality. The circle is a symbol of perfection as there is no point on the circle that is further or closer to the center than any other. All symbols are inherently limited by the dualistic limitations of our language and the geometry of space (and time) itself, so this illustration is no exception. Below are comments on the five “stages” of the overlap and reunification of what never was separate in truth, but only in our shadowy self-imprisoned “cave thinking” of apartness.

1. We symbolically seem apart, and our “sphere of awareness” is limited to a separate self, and we don’t believe we share anything with anyone else; this is the state of perpetual war that is fundamental to all dualistic thinking.
2. The barely overlapping circles depict that there is now a glimmer of realization that we’re not alone. We’re all “fighting the same hard battle,” but we gain hope, solace, and inspiration from the occasional breakthrough moments when we realize we do indeed share the same interest in “going home” to the Oneness we never left in Truth. We’re mostly “asleep,” dreaming of being exiled from the peace of true connection, but now we have instants of sanity that motivate us to consider our thoughts of interconnectedness and sameness as vital to our real progress.
3. This “midpoint” example geometry is known as the “vesica piscis” (and other names like mandorla or almond), where the center of one circle touches the circumference of the other. This might represent a halfway point in our journey from separate interests to shared interests, from insanity to sanity, from duality to unity. There are many references to the vesica piscis on this website.
4. The fourth image brings to mind moments just before or after a total eclipse; the antithesis of the second phase, this would be akin to having a mind that now defaults to seeing shared interests instead of separate interests, where we choose sanity most of the time instead of on rare occasions.
5. The fifth stage of total overlap requires explanation in that the two circles have “melted into one,” and there are no differences detectable. Because there aren’t any obvious examples in our everyday world, this symbol merely attempts to represent a state where time and space have been transcended. In the eclipse example, light is diminished by one shape occulting (hiding) another, yet in the mental metaphoric realm, the opposite is true: the unlimited light is joined and becomes greater than the sum of its parts because there are no longer separate parts! This graphic is woefully inadequate in expressing the idea of a “oneness joined as one,” but our dualistic minds have a tough time with that, too! Not to worry!

The important “take-home lesson” of this example is that—in keeping with the Platonic idea that symbols are not sources—as we expand our definition of Self (as a circle of infinite diameter would embrace all), the idea of an “other” self (equally expanded to embrace totality) would be indistinguishable and resolve all differences, conflicts, polarities, uncertainties, loneliness, and fear. For more about non-duality, my other blog may be helpful, particularly this post.

“As nothingness cannot be pictured, so there is no symbol for totality.” (ACIM, T-27.III.5:1)