In my original post I attempted to skirt a line between common ideologies pertaining to the microcosmic-macrocosmic duality (or dichotomy as it sometimes feels). In short, I friggin blew it; hence I decided to dump the article.
Insteadwards I’ll use this here space to clarirectimify a point of confusion I sometimes encounter. Here goes:
Microcosm and Macrocosm
It’s actually uncomplicated. You are the microcosm, meaning you are the universe in human form. Aham Brahman Asmi, as them Hindu fellars over yonder in India say.
The processes of the universe (multiverse?) are reflected in your body, mind, and spirit. Hence you are the “mini me” of the universe.
That’s it.
Obviously macrocosm simply refers to the universe, or we can just say reality as a whole.
Elemental Exclusions and Planetary Prioritization
People often incorrectly assert that microcosmic magic is the work of the four elements and macrocosmic magic deals with the planetary powers. This is a highly skewed and simply inaccurate portrayal of the matter.
The four elements are present both in microcosmic and macrocosmic considerations. From an earthly or sublunary perspective the four are used to describe and discuss the energies in us and the world around us. On a grander scale and against the solar backdrop the planets and signs of the Zodiac all have elemental attributions.
Speaking of the zodiac, people and life on earth obviously reflect planetary powers and emanations. Come to think of it, that’s part of what the microcosm is and what started this conversation.
You don’t need yet another division or category set to complicate things so don’t fool with the ideas of microcosmic magic vs macrocosmic magic. These are two aspects or perspectives of reality, not schools of thought or methodology.
Leave a Reply