simple forms that together they create a fusion for uniting science with spirituality. They are the archetypal forms that are the warp and woof of the universe, intrinsic symbols of both religion and science creating an elegant equation of unification. Elegant equations are what theorists call formulas such as Einstein's E=mc2 and Newton's every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Other such examples of elegant equations include “God is Love” (1 John 4:16 NRSV) and “you reap whatever you sow.” (Gal. 6:7 NRSV) Elegance is a term that applies to formulas that are uncomplicated and symmetrical, yet within such formulas are great scope and power.
It is for the readers themselves, of course, to determine the level of profoundness this discourse evokes. Perhaps they will see the source of a theory beyond a Holy Grail-type of scientific search for a unified theory of everything and find the basis of a unified theory of science and God. This would, beyond a doubt, be a unified theory of All.
For sciences and religions both have multiple branches that, in essence, are seeking the same thing—an understanding of the Creative Forces of the universe, of God, of our meaning. What will be shown here is that the basic natures of both sides’ pursuits have exhibited the expression of such forces and meaning in the symbolism of the triangle and the arc. These symbols actually identify the unity of religion and science.
In my small way what is being presented here is a perspective of the Perennial Philosophy put forth by such luminaries as Leibniz and Huxley. The concept of this philosophy is that the divine reality (divine ground) is the source of spiritual insight and higher consciousness throughout the world's ages and cultures. In addition the varied religions have interpreted this infinite ground through finite minds creating only skewed parts or aspects of it.
From a science-based viewpoint of this alpha, divine reality, the physicists have their own search for a “theory of everything.” Here science is also interpreting the infinite with finite lenses and grasping only limited parts. Using a scientific analogy, their quandary could be compared to a shattered hologram. A hologram has the unique property that the film from which it is projected can be divided into pieces, yet each piece will project the entire hologram, only with a narrower, skewed perspective.
Ultimately the evidence put forth here is that the geometry employed both by spiritual philosophies and science are used to explain life and the cosmos, the microcosm and macrocosm. Science may try to say this is not evidence of a higher collective consciousness or of Creative Forces, but then how was this shared symbolism which threads through both sciences and spirituality and was intuited thousands of years before science confirmed these same geometries explained with other than a shared higher consciousness of the whole?
The irony of both their searches is that they regularly focus on external surface phenomenon. There is a degree as well as a need and purpose for this, but it is not the conclusion. Whether it is Newtonian physics that works on the surface versus quantum physics that works in the essence or dogma versus spirituality, the final leg of the journey is within. In both schools history has shown their paradigm-shifting illuminations have invariably been through an inward intuitive experience.
That is why anybody who has the gift of tongues must pray for the power of interpreting them. For if I use this gift in my prayers, my spirit may be praying but my mind is left barren. What is the answer to that? Surely I should pray not only with the spirit but with the mind as well? And sing praises not only with the spirit but with the mind as well? Any uninitiated person will never be able to say Amen to your thanksgiving, if you only bless God with the spirit, for he will have no idea what you are saying. However well you make your thanksgiving, the other gets no benefit from it. (I Corinthians 14:13-18)3
The Journey Begins
So from where would such concepts about geometric figures and the depth of their significance germinate? In the introduction spiritual and scientific laws were touched upon. So let us begin with some of the oldest laws recorded—those brought down from Mount Sinai.
This examination began as a thought experiment about what was the actual shape of the biblical Ten Commandments and why their shape would be of consequence. It takes us back to a time when religious leaders and scientists were one and the same. Moses, the leader and patriarch of the Israelites, prophet to Christians and Moslems alike, is an example. He is known as the giver of the Law. Often the vision of a great figure standing on a mountain veiled in smoke and illuminated by lightning flashes comes to mind. Can you envision him standing there, face aglow, holding the two tablets of the Law, the Ten Commandments, given to him by God? Moses was also raised as a prince in the royal household of the Egyptian pharaoh, and such an upbringing would bring with it the highest possible education in the sciences.
Though most are familiar with the commandments being written on stone referred to as tablets, the Hebrew word luah translates as both tablet and table. Table is the term used in the King James Version of the Bible. Luah also translates as “house of the soul.”1 The translation of luah as house of the soul and its symbolism as this house leads to the hypothesis of triangular tablets being addressed here.
Fig. 1.1—Moses with the Tablets
The Ten Commandments is also known as the Decalogue—meaning ten words or utterances. It may be considered a symbolic, spiritual core of Mosaic Law, much as the periodic table of the elements in science categorizes the discovered fundamental substances that make up the universe. These ten words written on stone symbolize, in essence, the way to act with both God and man, but are meanings engraved in more than just the words on these stone tablets? Are there meanings in the shapes of the tablets themselves? In Exodus 32:15 it states that the tablets had writing on both sides, that the writings could be seen through the tablets. Could this indicate that there are meanings for us in the words and the shape of the tablets as well as through the very stone itself? Remember, literacy of the general population is a recent event in humankind's history. Nowhere in the Bible are these shapes described. My intuition is that they are two triangular tablets or tables.
The search to validate or invalidate this premise and its significance turned into an exploration that expanded beyond the Tables of the Law. It led down a path that wound through myths, science, religions, and ancient mystery schools. The quest was one that ultimately joined all of these facets through shared symbolism and meaning and became an investigation not just of the triangle but also of the parabola, commonly known as an arc. It ended with the discovery of a strong unifying pattern between these symbols that creates a bridge both in the macrocosm and the microcosm of humankind's experience. The key to seeing this pattern is in the deeper meanings of the triangle and the arc. The meanings can be found in their different manifestations, aspects, and dimensions. Such triangular aspects can be seen in many forms including pyramids, stars, and diamonds. The parabola or arc, best known from geometry's conic sections, appears in circles, spirals, ellipses, and such shapes as the Christian ICTHYS symbol and its more ancient brethren, the vesica pisces. Within their combined symbolism is a vital universal message—a message in a glyph-like language barely remembered, but still imprinted upon the fabric of spacetime and our consciousness. We, similar to children learning the meanings of their surroundings, need to discover again the archetypal meanings of these symbols to gain their messages.
P.D. Ouspensky writes of the difficulty of grasping the essence and incorporating the meanings of such symbols within us and trying to communicate that meaning to others. He speaks of this when one is attempting to transmit to another “objective knowledge,” that is knowledge “based upon ancient methods and principles of observation, knowledge of things in themselves, knowledge
