We have laid out three ways of knowing the spiritual realm, which is further proposed as the true realm. The physical realm is but an echo.
The difficulty remains that – ordinarily – we know the physical realm with a higher degree of confidence than the spiritual. It feels more real because it is more obvious and less deniable.
There is a reason, after all, that apostates are made by imprisonment and torture.
So if there are three ways of knowing the spiritual, which are nevertheless nebulous to the populace; and if we have a systematic and reliable way of learning about the physical; what could ground us more firmly in true knowledge of the spiritual?
Here is my thesis: The spiritual realm is the source of the physical. It is often analogous to, but not an exact emanation of, the spiritual.
In some ways this sounds like Plato. I said before – honestly – that I don’t know whether the world of Forms is real. Nevertheless, we are not saying that there are forms, per se. We are saying that, if one imagines that forms exist, it gives us a useful way of learning about the spiritual from our experience of the physical.
Indeed, suggesting that humans have a spiritual sense captures what we’re about here – that one’s physical senses are analogous to one’s spiritual sense.
But what if your spiritual sense is dull, or inoperative? Or what if you simply don’t trust it?
What if you think Plato is interesting, but he’s mostly talking ho-bunk?
If, still, you wish to learn something about the spiritual realm, I suggest you can learn it by a careful study of the physical realm. We’ll take some examples next time.
There is a reason, after all, that saints are made by imprisonment and torture.