https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=wITJ3r96hKQ
All right, I think this works. I can see my face. All right, guys, so let’s wait a few seconds for people to come in. And then hopefully everything will be okay. You know, when Jordan Pearson talks about kind of going into the unknown and doing things you’re not used to doing. This is really for me. This is really the kind of thing that drives me, that makes me extremely nervous. All right, I’ve never been a very technical person. And so, you know. All right, so this is working. I’ve got the chat. Let’s wait another few minutes so that people can come in. I got my images. All right, okay. So let’s go. So I wanted to try this as a live chat just because I figure because it’s a surprise chat, there won’t be too many people in the chat. And so I’ll be able to kind of pay attention to what you’re saying and maybe interact with you guys a little more than I do in the in the Q&A. And a lot of people have been asking me to do an interpretation of the recent image I did of the flood as a cosmic image. And I wanted to make a color version. I wanted to make a color version from the start. And so I decided to wait until I had the color version to do the interpretation for you guys. So last week I put it out. People can buy it as a print or on merchandise or whatever. And so I thought, let’s do this. Let’s do a color version. It has a nice rainbow, which it’s just I just feel like now’s a good time to talk about images with rainbows. I don’t know why. And so I think that we can look at the symbolism here and I’ll show you guys at the same time. Hopefully I can make this work. I’ll also try to show you some of the images on which it is based because it is not a it’s not just something that I took out of my imagination, but it’s based on several traditional images as well. And so I see Brad is in the chat. Good to see you. Sorry, I didn’t warn you and other moderators that I was doing this, but you know, that’s how it is. OK, so let’s go. And so the image you’re seeing is, of course, I tried to I’ve been I’ve been I made this image of the image of everything. Everybody has seen it and I interpreted it. But I wanted to also show people how this image of everything it’s it’s obviously there are there’s variation in the way you can represent the kind of the same pattern. You can represent it through different angles. And so I wanted to try to maybe take a few other stories in scripture and represent the same kind of cosmic pattern by emphasizing that particular story, but then also emphasizing different aspects of this kind of cosmic pattern, because I always want to be careful people don’t just equate the image with the pattern in itself. The image is is trying to kind of reveal this pattern to you, but it’s not the full thing. It’s a it’s a it’s a clothing, right? It’s a it’s an image of something which is invisible and a pattern which is invisible. All right. So. So if you look at the we can start with what is referenced in terms of the the image of everything, the Genesis one, where the first one I did. So what I wanted to do, of course, is to try to show it also this the fractal nature of reality. And so you can understand very easily that this whole image of the Garden of Eden and what’s going on there is ultimately is ultimately now in here where you have the garden in the background and you have the flood coming up to the gates of the garden. So this little hill here with the four rivers and the tree in the center, which is now the tree of life and which is equivalent, of course, to the cross here in this image. Here I’d only put the two rivers. But traditionally, it’s actually more it’s more usual to show the four rivers of paradise kind of coming down the mountain. So I have the same structure with the four rivers and the tree at the top. An interesting tradition about the flood is there are many people saying to them, saying that from the Syrian and other saints talk about how the flood came up to the gates of the garden. But the garden was never flooded. And you can understand that as the idea of this pristine reality, which was preserved kind of like the ark itself, but it was preserved at the top of the world. It’s something like the preserving of the seed or the preserving of the principles that are at our top. And there’s some really wild traditions which came out of this idea that the garden was in flooded. For example, there are interesting traditions according to which according to who according to its Melchizedek was, you know, I forget who it was, someone who was preserved in the Garden of Eden during the flood and then kind of came out afterwards. I forget who he’s supposed to be. That’s horrible, though, that he was preserved in the garden. And then came out after the flood, which is why we say that Melchizedek has no father and mother, that he has no generation, let’s say. So are there different traditions of things that are kept in the garden even during the flood? The idea of the tree of life being preserved also in the garden. It’s just different ways of explaining the problem of the flood and how, you know, despite the flood, you always need to have something which is which is preserved above so that then the world can kind of take shape from below again. So this is what I wanted to show in terms of the relationship between the Garden of Eden and the flood itself. And so. The image of the tree of life, it’s complicated to show the tree of life, and I always struggled to to do that. It’s actually rare that it’s shown in iconography. Usually the image which is shown is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. So I was wondering how to do that. And what I thought of doing was to base the idea of the tree of life on the image of the glory of God. And so you can see up above this these three half circles where the. Let me close up here a little bit. So if you if you look at this this section here, you can see this is a traditional way of representing the glory of God, which is the idea of the divine darkness, which is behind the glory. So there’s a dark circle in the inside and then you see a lighter circle next to it and then a white or very, very light circle on the outside. This is something that you’ll see often in icons at the top of icons. You’ll see it in the icon of of the baptism of Christ of theophany. You’ll see it also in sometimes the glory of Christ himself. If you see Christ in the ascension or sometimes in the Anastasis, we see Christ descending into hell. You’ll see this kind of mandorla that has a dark on the inside and then light on the outside. It really is this idea of something which is beyond name, which is then manifesting itself in identity. But behind this identity is actually something which transcends identity, which is which is beyond images, beyond beyond light. And so what I wanted to do is to kind of in the in the whole image, you’ll see there’s a lot of reflecting where there’s a sense in which the cause of something is the reflection of the other. And this is what I wanted to show here, where at the top you have this this divine darkness, which manifests itself into light. And then in the tree, you have the light at the center, which is kind of darkening as you leave the center. And this is based on a lot of traditions about the temple, of course, as the temple, we have these sticker veils or the idea, Saint Ephraim the Syrian talks about the four rivers of paradise, which as they go down the the the mountain of paradise, get mixed and mitigated and are not as pure as they are at the beginning of their journey, let’s say. And so you have this this sense of this light kind of darkening as you get further and further from the center. But when you when you balance it with this idea of divine darkness, then you you don’t run the risk of just having this what I could say, a kind of Gnostic vision or a simplistic vision where we have this idea that everything that’s on the outside is just impure. Everything that’s dark is just bad and everything that’s light is just good. That’s not that’s the the base. The the cosmic pattern is more complex than that. And so you have the tree of life, which is at the top of the garden, you have the four rivers. And here this is interesting because a lot of people were confused about about these images, the two the images that are that are next to the that are next to the tree. People were wondering, we’re struggling to understand who that was. And what I wanted to represent was something like before the before the flood and after the flood. And so the and also the idea of this, you could say the relationship between something because there’s a there’s a pattern in scripture, which is that before a flood or before a crossing of waters, there’s something like an ascension. There’s something there’s something about someone going up and before the flood, you have. And so this is a lot of people thought this was Elijah, but it’s not Elijah. The idea of having Elijah there would make no sense in terms of this story. It’s Enoch who is ascending into heaven before the flood. But I’m using the trope of of Elijah. First of all, because if you look at very early manuscripts, I couldn’t find an image of it, though I was looking for it before and I couldn’t I have it somewhere in my papers or I lost them during the flood. But there are earlier images of representations of saints like Enoch in which he’s represented in the divine chariot. And so that’s also why at the ascension, Christ, if you look at images of the ascension, you’ll notice they have these wheels under the older versions, especially you have wheels under the angels because it’s also Christ ascending into heaven in a divine chariot. And so all the images of ascension really have this sense of the Merkabah or this divine chariot, which is the vehicle by which the saint ascends. And so this is Enoch. And then this is actually Noah, who is sacrificing after the flood. So before the flood, you have this kind of from the dry land, this going up of the Holy One and going up of the Holy One or the disappearance of the Holy One has something to do with the flood itself, you could say, you know, or this transformation or this change that’s going to happen. And so it’s not necessarily negative, but there’s definitely this the change that’s going to happen. So you see that with Elijah going up as well. You also see it with Moses’s body being taken up as before Israel is able to cross the Jordan to go into the promised land. And there are versions, of course, the ascension of Christ himself ends up kind of being the culmination of all that. And then afterwards, you have the sacrifice of Noah. And so you have a sense of the same going up. And then here you have the sacrifice going up, but the blessing coming down as well. So we understand this as this new blessing that God gives to Noah. It’s hard. It was hard to represent this totally. But you can also understand that at this moment when Noah finishes the flood and is on the mountain, you know, the Mount Ararat, he also received the law. And so there’s a sense in which this new beginning is a sacrifice. It’s also the receiving of a new law for the new world, which is about to begin. OK, so let’s look into the chat. So people say, can you explain divine darkness a little more? I would say if you’re interested, there are many videos on my channel that talk about this idea of divine darkness, and especially my chats on St. Gregory of Nyssa, he talks about divine darkness quite a bit. And so I think that you can find the answers you’re looking for in that, because it would be difficult to go into it too much, to go into it too much into it right here. OK, so above here, above the the the rainbow, we have, of course, this cosmic image here. You have. Let me just back up a little bit. I hope you can see my cursor again. So here you have the sun and here you have the moon. And of course, I’m trying to play a little bit with color. I’m not a super I’m not super good with color, but I was trying to kind of use some trying to suggest some symbolism with color. And so there’s this a lot of people have noticed, you know, how in Christ and the Virgin, in some traditions, you’ll have Christ with one color inside, one color outside, and the Virgin with the opposite. And so this is what I was kind of trying to suggest, the idea that they’re similar to what you have here in the divine glory and the tree of life, which is that, you know, there’s a sense that there’s a reflection of causation. And so here you have the blue on the inside and the red on the outside with the blue on the outside and the red on the inside. And so I’m trying to kind of show this. You’ll see it all through the image where this this it’s almost like a yin yang image, you know, where you have the white dot in the black in the black part. There’s a sense in which the the the motor of something is. There’s something which you’re moving to, which is kind of like you’re moving towards not the opposite, but that the vision of the opposite is the drive of your identity. You know, and so as you notice something, let’s say, especially in terms of male and female, you could say. So the the existence of masculinity manifests itself in a drive towards the feminine and the feminine manifests itself as a drive towards the masculine. So this relationship is important to understand because opposites are related to each other. They don’t just exist standalone. They they’re they’re moving towards each other. And so that’s probably the best way to see all of this. But it’s easier to show it in an image form than it is to explain it. So it’s better to just create these patterns of reflection so that people can kind of get kind of see it and and get a sense of it. So you’ll see this all through the image, the two angels, of course, having the same pattern of blue and pink and then pink and blue. And then it goes down through this. I don’t want to talk about the the the rainbow right away. We’ll talk about the rainbow a little later. Let’s talk a little more about just a little more about the the flood itself. And so, of course. This flood is this the primordial waters that are manifested again, so you can have a sense of this this beginning of Genesis where it talks about the waters of chaos. So this is really these really are the waters of chaos, the same as we could see the same waters that you could see in my image of everything, of course. And traditionally, the thing with the image of Noah is just how much today it has become, you know, the idea that this story of Noah can be like a kid’s story and then you can have like little plush toys about it. It’s just it’s just such a it’s just an amazing thing because it’s such a it’s such it’s like the most dramatic story that has ever been told or the most like radically disturbing story that has ever been told. But here and today, for some reason, it’s for kids. And so and so in the ancient images, it was very traditional to show to show dead bodies in the water. So, for example, you can see in this one, you’ll find a similar pattern to what I’m doing. You’ll see how it’s split in half. And there is the right hand of Noah with the white bird, the left hand of Noah with the black bird. I do it a little differently. I really like how these types of images do it. But for some reason, I couldn’t fit it to do it this way in my image, where you see the white bird here coming from Noah. And then on the right side of Noah, you see the white bird finding the branch at the bottom of the image here. And then you see the black bird here feeding on the remainder of the ancient world. And so this is really a very deep understanding of the idea of the black bird and the white bird or the left hand and the right hand, where the branch is really the idea of structure. That’s what a branch is. It’s a structure. And so it’s a finding of a pattern. And so the white bird goes off at first, can’t find the pattern. So it comes back and then ultimately it goes and then it does find the pattern. And so it finds the pattern and brings the pattern back to Noah. And the black bird goes off and doesn’t return. And so the idea of it not returning has to do with how it is now. It finds the residue of the old world. And that’s what the left hand is. That’s what the kind of symbolism of the dark side of the left hand is, which is this idea of recognizing things that aren’t part of the identity and seeing them. And so the black bird goes off and feeds off the residue of the ancient world and usually represented as eating the carcass of a donkey, which makes sense in terms of the donkey already representing the foreigner, the stranger representing the wildness of the wildness that somehow though can still kind of be tamed. But in scripture, the idea of the donkey really does represent the foreign, the strange, that which isn’t connected to my pattern. So that’s how to understand it. And so you have the pattern from the white bird and then you have that which is not connected to my pattern related to the black bird. And so here it’s nice because you have you’ll have a cow here, which is a pure animal that they could eat on the right side of Noah. You’ll have a man who and a woman. And then you have an impure animal, which is the donkey on the left side of Noah. So all of this is very, very intuitively right in terms of of these images. A lot of these ancient images are very powerful in that sense. So now if you look at mine, you’ll see that I tried to do something very similar. You can see though on the right hand of Noah, on our left hand, on the right hand of Noah, you have the white bird bringing back the branch to Noah. And so and what I wanted to suggest was how the can you see this? What I wanted to suggest was how the the white bird was carrying a little version of the tree of life as the kind of basic pattern of reality. And so I wanted this little branch to have the same motif as the as the tree of life as well. And then and then at the bottom of the image, you have the black bird feeding on the donkey. You can’t get a better image than that. There’s no point in even trying such a great such a great way of representing this. And so similar similar I wanted I have a man on the right hand of Noah, which is which will be a reflection of the sons of Noah, which on his right hand and then a woman on the left side of Noah, which is a reflection of his daughters and his wife on his left hand. And so you’ll see that there’s this kind of reflecting where there’s a dead version in the water of that which is alive above. And so the men, the women, but also at the bottom of the image, I wanted to show the here you can see there’s a chariot which is in the waters. And of course, this reflects to the chariot above of the chariot of the chariot of Enoch. This chariot here reflects a chariot of Enoch, but it also reflects the idea of in the flood, not in the flood, but the crossing of the waters in the story of Moses. You get a sense that it’s really important in the in the song, especially Miriam song, but in the story that the chariots of the Egyptians are part of the story. And so the the Egyptians with their chariots gets drowned in the sea. And this is also an image of technology or an image of civilization itself. It has to do with the descendants of Cain and how the descendants of Cain developed technology. So the idea that technology gets swept away in this flood or that civilization, the walls of the of the temple, the walls of the city gets swept away. And so this is why also I have the wall of a city here, which is, of course, reflecting the wall of the garden itself. And so this is the this is all of here is the same thing. So the pattern here is you could say the positive aspect of the pattern. And then down here is the pattern breaking down because it was at first it was done pridefully, let’s say. So it ends up breaking down. So it’s also a way for me to kind of try to help people see that all of it, everything is good if it’s in the right place. It’s not about things being good or bad. It’s always about things not being in the proper place. And so and so you have the wall of the city. Of course, I wanted to put a warrior with a helmet and a sword. And I want to make the warrior a little bigger than the one there just to suggest the giants kind of getting swept up in all of this. And of course, the giant here that is getting swept up in the flood is a reflection of the angels up here who are properly in their place and not doing any of that any of that intermingling that they’re not supposed to be doing with the humans. All right. So I’m going to what I’ll do is I’ll get through this and then I’ll do I’ll do the super chats at the end. I’m seeing people putting in super chat. So I will do the super chat. I’ll do it the way that I usually do at the end of the conversation so that I don’t kind of break the flow of what I’m trying to explain. So I’ve got until eleven. I’ll stop a little before eleven. So we should be able to get through all this and the super chats as well. OK. And so so I’ve got pretty much down here. So of course, I wanted to show the fish down here and the fish, you know, they’re living places in the water. And so they represent the possibilities of fish, the possibilities of life in the water. I wanted to have like a blue and a red fish just to show, let’s say, the positive and negative or the inside outside aspect of the fish as well. Of course, the fish will become an image, a very important image for Christians because they represent Christ going down. So look at that. Christ goes down into all of this, goes down into the mouth of hell to get the little fishies, you know, to come and fish us out of the death. It might seem quaint, but it’s not quaint. It really is very much an image of what Christ is representing. And so I wanted to help people see that it’s in the flood. You already get a sense that Christ is not afraid of the flood. Like Christ will dive into the flood and is willing to go get the life hidden that is even hidden down in the depth of that of that flood. So that’s why I wanted to have the little fishies down there. And so, of course, here I forgot this part. Of course, here you have an altar, which is which is now flooded as well. And it was mostly to show, let’s say, the you could say the wrong sacrifice. You can imagine it as the sacrifice of Cain, the sacrifice which was rejected by God. That’s what ends up now getting flooded in the water. All right, so let’s look at the Ark. And so there’s so many interesting ways of doing the Ark. And man, it’s hard to choose because the the ancients. Let me show you a few really amazing images of of arcs. OK, so this is an image of the Ark that I really love because the Ark is represented just like a simple house. Here you can see again. You can see how the sons of Noah and the daughters of Noah and his wife are separated the way that I did. It’s flipped, but it’s still the same meaning. And then you have the images of the animals below in this kind of tiered structure. This is really a very, very to me, it’s just the basic sense of of a good way to represent the Ark. Here’s another version of that one, which I like a lot because in this one you also have the daughters, the daughters and wife’s wife of Noah. You have his sons, you have the bird bringing the branch back to Noah here. And in the Ark you have like a hierarchy of animals, which I really like. Down here you have the dead man, dead woman like I did. And then you also have the bird eating a guy now, which is a little intense for me. I didn’t want to go all the way there eating a human person. But then you see the bird here getting the branch from the tree. And there’s like an interesting hierarchy of animals here where the birds are represented above. So you can see all of here you have these different birds. Then you have a representation of what could be called the tame animals, right, or the animals that we kind of understand in terms of in terms of, you know, a donkey, a horse, you know, sheep, cows, all of these kind of animals that we pigs, gazelles, these animals that we have. And as you get lower, then you get all the funky animals. And so you have these like Chimera creatures down here and you have a Griffin and and you even have look at this. You even have monsters down here. Can you see the monsters people down here? It’s amazing. It’s like I man, I love the Middle Ages so much. So down here you have these like little you have these little monsters there. So you want to know why there’s still monsters after the flood. That’s because it seems some of them were taken into the Ark, according to the medieval. And so it ends up being a cosmic image. I mean, that’s the idea. It’s like, you know, when I talk to you about the map of the world and how you have to imagine now the map of the world with the humans in the center. And then as you get further, you have these stranger and stranger things. And that’s why just naturally they will they will have tended to put these monsters on the edge of the Ark. It’s at the bottom of the Ark, close to the edge of the world. And so the Ark being a kind of cosmic image, they just would make sense that you would do it that way. It’s very intuitive. And so there was something also I liked about the idea of. I don’t think you can see this. Let me just. Oh, you can’t see it because it’s not. All right. So I wanted to I really wanted to have I like this version quite a bit because the birds are kind of at the top of the Ark. And I really like the idea of the the Ark having an animal quality to it itself. You know, and it’s not just in the Ark. It’s not just in the Ark. The you have this idea of the kind of the Viking ship or these different ships that would have an animal at the mast at the head of the ship. So I really I really enjoyed I really like this idea of having the animals coming into the Ark, but the Ark itself as having a kind of animal quality to it. And so that’s why I made my Ark with a little dragon’s head here at the top of the Ark. Because there’s something about the Ark that is animality itself that it’s it’s not all that there’s more, but there is an aspect of it. And so you can also understand it as a church. If you understand the Ark as the church, then you also understand that the gargoyle the gargoyle is on the outside. And so I didn’t put my monsters inside the Ark like those medievals that had a lot of gall to do that. I actually put my monster on the outside of the Ark so that the gargoyle is is is on the outside just like in a church, which makes total sense. All right. So we’re actually almost done, I think, in terms of explaining it, basically. And so I think that’s the whole point of the Ark. All right. So we’re actually almost done, I think, in terms of explaining it, basically. And so at the bottom, I forgot to talk about the bottom of the image. And so at the bottom of the image, you really have what’s known as the mouth of Hades, the mouth of death. Those of you that are following the Lord of Spirits podcast, you will have, you know, Father Stephen and Father Andrew talked about the mouth of death. There are different ways of representing this mouth. Often it’s represented sideways like this. This is often how it’s represented in images of the Last Judgment in terms of orthodox images of the Last Judgment. So you can see down here you have this kind of image of the mouth of death. So you have Christ, the judgment, and then all these these these souls going into this this mouth of Hades. But it is also often represented the way I did, which is from below, this kind of mouth looking up. And so. I mean, it’s totally fine to represent it in different ways. I really like I like this version for what I was doing, because I wanted I also wanted the the mouth of hell to. To be represented like a container, you know, like this kind of this this unholy vase, you could say that’s at the bottom of the world and it’s kind of devouring things. Like the bottom of the ocean, something like that. And so that’s how I’d really like the idea. And also, of course, that it’s upside down makes it so easy to so intuitive to, of course, understand the mouth of death as being kind of upside down and being the reverse of the the rainbow. All right, so on the arc now we have the the sons of Adam on his right hand and the oops, sorry, and the. The daughters are not Adam, the sons of Noah on his right hand and the daughters of Noah on his left hand. And so this is where I was trying to kind of play a little bit more, you know, trying to experiment a little bit with color. I’m not used to using color as I am a carver, as you all know. But I wanted to. So I have I have Noah with white, white with dark shadow, let’s say, or dark reflection. And then I wanted his wife to be kind of dark with light reflection. And then his sons are the primary colors and the and the daughters are the the secondary colors. And so that was the idea, because it’s it’s almost like you also understand that it’s like the rainbow playing itself out as well in the world. And so the rainbow has all the primary and secondary colors in it. You know, it’s six colors. And so that’s what I wanted to have down here. And so you can see that, you know, I have at the right hand of Noah, the white bird that is the same white bird that I have on my right hand. And then I have the secondary color that I have on my left hand. I have the black bird that is the same white bird that is the same white bird that is the same white bird that is here. And then on his left, he have the black bird, which is the same black bird that goes down and eats the donkey. And then I wanted to have this interesting mirror that I’ve been talking about where I have the secondary colors as the birds above the sons of Noah And so I wanted to have this idea of this kind of idea of this mirrored causality, this causality in opposites that that I wanted to suggest. And so, of course, the birds being at the top are like angels or principalities at a lower level or representation of principalities, just like these angels that are above here. And so and so now we come to the rainbow itself. So I really wanted the rainbow to be like the Dome of Heaven itself, you know, and kind of separate this cosmic aspect up here, the stars as as the let’s say the immovable stars as these principalities that are that are really, really high and really abstract. And then have this lower pattern under the under the Dome of Heaven, which is paradise, which is, you know, the the ascension of Enoch and then the sacrifice, which starts the next world. So kind of like the end in the beginning and this and this place where it all comes together in paradise. So, of course, then now the rainbow becomes this. This multiplicity above you could say, and also an image of the limit at the same time. The rainbow is very is a very interesting has a very interesting symbolism because it is multiplicity. And so you always have to kind of understand the rainbow as a circle. But the circle, this multiplicity is above and below. And so there’s a relationship. But I wanted to for sure show the white light as the source of the rainbow. So that’s why I have the chrism, the key row. The this is a an image of the first two letters of Christ. So like this and a row with what looks like a P, the second letter in the name of Christ and what looks like an X is the first letter. But what’s mostly important in this, why I chose this, except besides across, like I could put across there, the more modern the later images would tend to have across. But the reason why I chose the key row was to really emphasize the six. So you have one right one, you have six points, which are the six colors of the rainbow, which are now in a white circle, which is the origin of the six colors. And so the idea of pure light or transparent light as being the the the origin of the of multiplicity as being the the source of multiplicity. And so that is the that is the basic idea. I don’t know if I’m missing anything. All right, let me look into the. Into the chat. Let’s see if people have questions. If you have so I’ll look at the super chat, but if you have questions, feel like there’s something I haven’t talked about, I will I will answer. And so Landabort for five dollars US says. Do you have any insight into the Old Testament liturgical symbolism and how the patterns show shown to Moses on the mountain continue into the divine liturgy? I mean, of course, it’s not it’s not. It’s not. The church itself is based on a three part, a three tiered structure, which is the same structure as the Tabernacle or the temple. And so you have an outside, you have an intermediary space and then you have total insight. So in my image, for example, in this in the image of this, you also have a three tiered structure, you could say. You basically have. You can see it differently in different ways, but you you have, let’s say here, this would be something like the altar area where you have the incarnate pattern, you could say, or the top of the mountain, the place where heaven and earth meet would be up here. And so you can understand all of the garden here as the as the altar area in the church. And then the the this is the nave. And and then, you know, let’s say that the top part would be the nave maybe. And then this would be the narthex, the transition space. Oh, what I forgot to explain was the animals. I forgot to explain the logic of the animals. My goodness. Why didn’t anybody tell me and chat? I’m not looking at the chat to see that if anybody’s actually talking about it. All right. So I the logic of the animals was something that I thought about for months. Man, it’s so hard to get it right because there are different ways to do it. But it’s really fascinating to see, you know, how different people do it. So here again, in this version of the art, you see the adults on top, then you see the birds and then you see the animals. But it doesn’t seem like there’s a logic in the animals, why they’re shown there. And the other one I showed you, there was definitely a logic in the way the animals were represented. And so my attempt, let’s say, was to separate to have to have a sense of. Have a sense of like two tiers or three tiers that the arc itself is is three tiers that they kind of be a microcosm, let’s say, of the whole thing, which is the three tiers in the Old Testament symbolism. And so you have on the right side here at the top, you have pure animals from the Old Testament rules. And on the left side, you have impure animals. Now. I wanted to have the lamb and the lion next to each other to kind of represent the possibility of the of paradise, right? This idea of the lamb and the lion laying together that we see in scripture. But I wanted to have them across from each other and made sense. It was great because, of course, the lamb is the animal of sacrifice, too, you know, and the lion is the animal of royalty. And so there’s something about that in terms of, let’s say, power, authority and power, let’s say, priestly and kingly, let’s say, was also part of that. But I also wanted so the animals on the right hand to be pure, but going towards so the going towards the giraffe, which a giraffe is actually a pure animal in the scripture. But it’s a foreign. It’s still exotic. It’s so strange. So it’s like a strange animal that you can eat. And then on the left hand, I wanted the impure animals. And so the lion who is impure, but also represents the king. And then the donkey, which is impure, but also rep, you know, if you think about the idea of the stranger that can be saved, you get a sense in scripture when Christ enters into Jerusalem on the back of a donkey. There’s a sense in which it’s also potentiality that can be mastered or or, you know, that can be embodied and can participate in the pattern. And then the dogs, you know, it’s all it’s all St. Christopher, but there’s also in the description of the New Jerusalem. It says the dogs will be excluded from the New Jerusalem. And so it was to have them. I still wanted them in there because there’s also a way in which Christ talks about the dogs receiving the crumbs which fall from the table. And so I wanted them, the dog to be there on the edge, receiving the crumbs from the table, you could say. All right. So down here is is very fascinating what happened because. I wasn’t sure how to do it like I wasn’t totally sure how to do it, so I wanted to have it was hard because I wanted to have the creepy crawlers down there or the lower animals. You know, the the the pig as the boar or the pig as an image of this wildness. But there’s also there’s some interesting. Interesting ideas of the pig, like interesting legends, especially like Jewish legends about the idea of a kosher pig or a pig that will learn to that will kind of learn to to be reintegrated, let’s say. But so that was kind of the idea of trying to have the pig down here. But then the other ones, I wanted to snake on the edge on the left, of course, because of the fall. And, you know, I wanted the locusts here because you can eat them. They’re actually a pure animal, but it was kind of struggling. But something someone showed me that I didn’t even realize was how these three, the the locusts, the rats and the frogs, they’re the plagues of Egypt. And I didn’t think of that at all when I did it. But it’s just interesting that I ended up lining them up. I could have chosen any animal like any kind of beast, but I ended up for some reason choosing these these these three animals next to each other to represent the plagues of Egypt. And I didn’t plan it. So it’s interesting. And so I wanted like and so you can eat locusts, which is make some pure creepy crawlers, but you can’t eat other other bugs. Like there’s all these other bugs you can’t eat, which aren’t which are, you know, even though they’re trying to get us to eat bugs. You can’t eat. You’re not supposed to eat bugs, at least not in the old. I mean, in the New Testament theory, you probably could, but man, it’s not eat bugs. All right. So that was that. That’s the animals. All right. OK, so let me start. Let me go back into the let me go back into the super chats because I kind of started and then I stopped. All right. I got like 10 minutes. So let’s try to do this. So Mike Larive says if opposites are driving toward each other, then how do you understand Christ and Satan as being being opposites? I don’t. I don’t understand Christ and Satan as being opposites. I don’t think that’s a that’s a good a good way to understand opposites in that terms. They’d be like Michael and Satan are opposites. And so they define each other. They also define each other sometimes not necessarily in this same productive way. And so imagine Michael killing the dragon. And so that’s also a kind of relationship of opposites where one is defining each other. But it’s also a hostile relationship. So let’s say Michael and Satan are more like the so-called you know, you can get this so wrong when he says Christ and Satan are the brothers or whatever. That’s total nonsense. They’re not. It’s like Michael and Satan are closer to the image of the hostile brothers. Definitely not Christ and Satan. Christ contains all of it. Christ contains a lot of people won’t understand it when I say it. I’m not saying Christ is the devil, but Christ contains, let’s say, everything about the devil which can be saved is contained in Christ. Let’s say it that way to avoid to avoid confusing people. So James Crotini for Five Day James. Good to see you, by the way. Incarnation of Christ necessitates the eventual emergence of Antichrist, right? You considered expressing this latter part pattern in your art. I mean, it’s yes, it’s there. It’s already there in certain images in terms of liturgical images where you have a sense of, you know, for example, images of the Last Supper and the images of the Last Supper. You really get a sense of Judas as this Antichrist figure you see in images like the betrayal of Judas where Judas kisses Christ. And so it’s already there in liturgical art. But I mean, in terms of my like that’s what my art is. My art is liturgical arts. I just follow the patterns that have been given to me. But in terms of the image of everything, it’s there. The mouth of hell has this kind of Antichrist idea. You know, the Leviathan has a kind of Antichrist idea. But it’s not exactly the same. I agree with you. It’s definitely worth the image of Antichrist is definitely very, very worth thinking about and trying to discern because it says that maybe even the believers will be duped. So James so soved gave five dollars. Thanks. So the soved zero. James. James again asked if I wanted to do an embodied symbolic world gathering, maybe some speakers and a surprise appearance by a certain enigmatic familial figure. Wouldn’t that be great? I think so. I would love to do that. It’s just I mean, COVID made everything complicated. So I don’t know how that’s going to play out. But I think it would be definitely be great to have to organize an event. Richard Rowland is talking about doing something like that, which would be in in like organize also with the publishing of a book, which is kind of bring together a lot of the symbolic world and symbolic world adjacent thinkers. So I think in the next few years we’re going to see that happen if we’re if we’re allowed to travel and stuff. So. So Douglas Horch for five dollars says he agrees with James and he says let’s have a symbolic world party at the edge of the world. Yeah, let’s do it. I’m totally for it. Definitely would love to do that. All right. So Jeremy Firth for ten dollars says he’s a little bit late, but it says who are the world figures associated with the sun and the moon above the rainbow? And so these are traditional ways of representing the sun and moon, which is to represent one as a king and a queen. And so a way to understand it is to understand it exactly as that. It says in scripture that God made the sun to rule the day and the lesser light, the moon to rule the night. So you can understand that in terms of a masculine principality like a king. You can understand the moon as a feminine principality like the you know, like that rules over the night. So it’s like light and dark. You know, so that’s the traditional way of representing them. Sometimes they’re not represented male and female. Sometimes they’re just ambiguous, but often they’re represented as male and female, not just in Christianity, but in also pagan cultures as well. And, you know, Father Stephen and Father Andrew on the Lord of Spirits, they’ve been talking about how it’s there’s also a lot of things that are not represented. There’s also a sense in which these images represent the principalities which govern these bodies. That is, the sun is not just a big ball of flaming gas. You know, the fact that it rules over our lives, it rules over our existence means that behind the sun, there’s also a principality. And you see this principality kind of submitting to Christ in the image of the crucifixion, kind of hiding themselves, you know, in this kind of reverence towards Christ in the crucifixion. And you see similar images, other kind of similar images as well. So Taylor Lewis, 50. U.S., are you familiar with Corbin’s interpretation of the flood? As flood soft gnosis, the dogmatic refuses to build a new arc for. But with floods of gnosis, demonic self crowning is all you get. And battle for law speech comes. I’m not sure, I don’t know if there’s something wrong with the way that you, floods of gnosis. The dogmatic refuses to build a new arc for. I mean, I don’t know. I’ve never read Corbin’s interpretation. I haven’t read a lot of Corbin. I’ve read some, but not a lot. I don’t know. I mean, I don’t think that, I don’t like that it’s used the word gnosis. It could be a flood of information. That could definitely be a way to understand it in the sense that sometimes a flood happens when new facts emerge. And so these facts appear. And so you have to, if you’re not able to kind of build an arc from the old world, then everything’s going to get dissolved. Because all of a sudden, things don’t fit anymore, right? You know, you have to adjust the pattern to the emergent facts to a certain extent. You have to be able to adjust it or else it’s going to break. So you can see how, you could say, well, this is a flood of information. You could say that one of the things that happened in the scientific era, I was in incapacity to do that, where all these scientific facts were kind of appearing and religious people tried to resist the facts or maladjust to the fact. And that’s one of the things that created the problem of modernism, you know, which is that you have this alien, you have this kind of schizophrenic worldview. On the one hand, you have these mythological spiritual patterns. On the other hand, you have the scientific kind of vision of the world and you can’t fit them together. And so because of it, you have this alienation. And those that try to fit it together are doing it in all kinds of weird ways. And, you know, and it doesn’t it just doesn’t die. So it doesn’t doesn’t work. So maybe that way I could understand it. But the word gnosis for me has a very particular meaning, especially a Christian meaning. It has similar to the sense of symbolism, which is really this joining of heaven and earth. That’s where gnosis happens. So all right, guys. So, yeah, I said I would stop a little bit for 11. And I think we got through everything. And so I’m really I’m really happy to see everybody show up in the chat. It was a lot of fun. And so let me see. All right. So so, yeah, so so I might do this. I might do this more often if it’s easy, because I kind of I kind of like the direct contact as well. And it it’s less complicated. I don’t have to kind of edit everything and think it out. I can make mistakes and you’ll forgive me because you’ll know it’s a live chat. So thanks for your support, everybody. Thanks for your attention. There are more videos coming soon. My next video that’s coming up will be a discussion with what Alaskan, the author of Louris, which are recorded a few weeks ago. And more discussion with Richard Rowland are coming down the line as well, as well as my video on the Mark of the Beast, which which which I want to make sure I get right before I put out. So so thanks, everybody. And I’ll talk to you very soon.