Not as learned, or literate as ebbixx
, there is, however, an aspect to niekin
's notion that has been gnawing at me since I first read it:
Quite simply, the memory of water is both an individual memory, and memory of the collective unconscious (a Jungian notion), of resting in the mother's womb, and of the evolutionary origins in the primeval ocean.
I would only suggest that the imagination, seeking its own origins, would cloak itself in those of the vessels it inhabits--both individual, and species.
I always liked the phrase ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny (however acceptable this notion now is), and cannot but feel it applies here.
Yes, I am joining imagination and consciousness for the purposes of this, but this also feels right, given the discussion of creation, mythology, and awakening.
I would even dare to suggest, at the risk of receiving the disapproval of empiricists, and scientists, that the only way we can see anything is because we have been prepared by centuries of belief.
Belief is nothing more than looking, and looking--seeing--is nothing more than belief. No scientific orthodoxy this, more alchemy.