John Wheeler demonstrated “the universe is a self-referential ‘strange loop’ in which physics gives rise to observers, then rise to information, which in turn gives rise to physics.” What we find here is something quite similar. We’ll discover that mirror relationships create a strange loop as well. An observation changes the perceiving when we focus upon the lessons, changes the information, changes the relationship, changes the information, changes the evolution, changes the observers, changes the physics.
Within, consciousness is fractal-holographic to the exact same awareness and health and state of mind in our every fiber as the mind is aligned. It is as though the past is healed when we heal an emotional wound in the present. THIS IS TRUE: When a pattern occurs in the present and it is healed, the pattern is healed throughout the past… everywhere.
David Bohm’s interpretation of quantum mechanics, overall worldview, and Special Relativity use what he referred to as the holomovement. Holomovement is “undivided wholeness” in process of becoming by “universal flux” not static oneness. By dynamic wholeness-in-motion, everything moves with an interconnectedness as though separared in space and time and yet is always every thing connected with everything else. Bohm expanded his ideas in his book, Wholeness and the Implicate Order, 1980. He included this in Special Relativity afterwards in 1981.
In this note (post), I include a course for you in holo-mirror, holo-movement. This is VERY POWERFUL work as this video demonstrates:
At 13:41 Gregg presents a graphic with a list of the seven mirrors:
1. Mirror of the Moment
2. Mirror of that which is Judged
3. Mirror of that which is Lost/Given Away/Taken Away
4. Mirror of Most Forgotten Love
5. Mirror of Father/Mother
6. Mirror of Your Quest into Darkness
7. Mirror of Self Perception
.
— everyone is a mirror —
every important person is an important mirror
— this always applies —
every important person is an important mirror
— everyone is a mirror —
seven mirror patterns
The First Mirror is my presence in the now moment… what we reflect by others in the present… what we radiate in the moment.
The Second Mirror is only very subtlety different but it reflects back to us that which we judge. It is what we have been wounded by and have an emotional charge on. It can be something we have done in the past that we have not forgiven. It is good to discern however that when we condemn another with an emotional charge we are most likely judging ourselves. This mirror is more difficult to understand as most people find it difficult to see the deeply wounded emotions within. We often think we have forgiven people and situations, when in fact they weaved subtlety into the very fabric of our being.
The Third Mirror reflects back to us something we have lost, given away or had taken away. When we see something we love in another it is often something we have lost, given away or that has been stolen within our personal lives. Every relationship is a relationship with the self and often we try to reclaim what we lost, gave away or had taken away as a child. All of which can be reclaimed within self. When we give away our power to another person, we suffer a form of soul loss, without realizing we send out a subtle frequency that others can feel, if they are experiencing the same energy loss, you will attract the same pattern of behavior back to you.
The Fourth Mirror reflects back to us our most forgotten love. This could be a way of life, or a lost or unfinished relationship. Often it is a past life where a wrong conclusion from a prior experience was made. These will recreate themselves over and over and over again until the conclusion is registered in the soul as wisdom. This is the most difficult to come to terms with as we all have made these sort of choices in our life, to leave someone, a place or much loved home, the pain of such a decision will imprint upon the soul or body hologram, once the lesson has been recognized you no longer attract these circumstances to you.
The Fifth Mirror reflects back Father/Mother. It is frequently stated that we marry our father or mother. We may display both healthy and unhealthy patterns we learned as a child. Our father and mother are often like Gods to us and so we will often reflect aspects of our relationship with them onto our partners. We often choose our partners based on our relationship with our parents.
The Sixth Mirror reflects back to us the Quest for Darkness or what is often referred to as a dark night of the soul. This is where we meet our greatest challenges, our greatest fears, and have been gathering the tools from life to confront and deal with. The most important thing to remember is that our soul is giving us the opportunity to grow and evolve, this will help us remove the vibration of victim. If we see these as opportunities for spiritual growth and from a perspective of soul advancement, they do not have to be feared; it is just passing through our life, asking us to seek answers from within rather than relying on others for answers.
The Seventh Mirror reflects back to us our self-perception. Others will perceive and treat us according to how we perceive and treat ourselves. If we are under a low self-esteem and do not accept our wisdom and beauty, others will not acknowledge them. If we are angry, bitter and unloving to others, they in turn will often react in the same way towards us. If we find another perception of ourselves, we alter the world. Maybe it is time to be kind, loving and compassionate with ourselves and others.
Combine mirror work with asking yourself… “Am I playing a role?” If you can recognize that you or the other is playing a role as Victim, Rescuer, or Persecutor, you will be able to accomplish far easier use of the mirror lessons.
This Essene work is tremendously powerful but very subtle.
.
Pay close attention to the training.
.
The ancient Essene had a very sophisticated understanding of interpersonal human relationships and the role of emotion in those relationships. It’s the role of emotion that we have carefully sifted out of our Western experience up until very recently. Now, as we go back into these texts, we see that it is emotion that proves the power and, when coupled with logic, true magic and miracles occur.
.
Qualities that we see in the people around us are directly related to our own traits that attract the mirroring others.
This is a summary of a panel conversation with scientists that have varying experiences and approaches to what is consciousness, or, mind and awareness. The two hour program is facilitated by A. H. Almaas (the pen name of Hameed Ali) featuring panelists Chris Fields, Henry Stapp, Julia Mossbridge, Stuart Hameroff, and Donald Hoffman (right to left).
I was asked to comment on this program at Facebook and as I watched it, I made some notes and I gave the program content some serious thought. This is not deeply steeped in scientific jargon. It isn’t an easy conversation for the average person either though. I do my best here to break it down. Here is the video program first, and my notes follow.
.
.
Notes:
First off, as Descartes said, “I think, therefore, I am” means to me that I cannot doubt that I have consciousness and awareness. Each of us may agree or not that what Descartes said is true or not. What I mean is that I cannot deny or doubt that consciousness is fundamental and essential to and for advancing human life. We may know little about how to advance awareness, and we may even doubt that our own past awareness is valid or reasonable, but we cannot doubt that there is awareness and that we are conscious. Consciousness is fundamental and essential for normal living; we must agree. Yet, our own experiences demonstrate that there are limits of conscious awareness.
So, I’d expect that if we are attempting to define consciousness that we’d agree to contemplate the present moment and what awareness we can attain in a moment so as to progress. Working together for evolving collaborative science requires expanding this awareness, realizing of course that we each have a different realty. We’ll each benefit if we pay attention to the sensations of breathing; notice the feeling in our feet when walking; and whenever finding that the mind wandered simply call our awareness back to sensations. We begin this way to discover contemplative science; evolving science and our own awareness.
Science, according to Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary simply is “knowledge attained through study or practice,” or “knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws, esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method [and] concerned with the physical world.” Science can move us forward into studies of consciousness by focusing on experiences of life, with increasingly good questions about consciousness and how consciousness is evolving in us as we attain awareness that we are connected in consciousness. Pause… we may not agree presently on that this occurs within consciousness. However, that we may explore, scientifically.
We all will agree that our awareness may expand to include more of what we had previously been unaware. Thus, as humans evolve awareness consciously, science may progress, and we might evolve further in truth toward global peace, human integrity, personal freedom, and social harmony. Or is that right? Do we care about those ideals?
My disappointment is that this discussion panel program is not really science, yet. I was surprised, these scientists stop short of agreement on a purpose. Consciousness science is necessary even though we do initially not understand that the varying experiences and limitations of a collective awareness. For example, the program did not advance a better question even as to what to look at…. such as, “How did absolute consciousness—indivisible, still, and unchanging—become this world of multiplicity and change?”
The purpose of science is to advance our understanding of reality. A purpose for advancing scientific studies of consciousness may include any hypotheses (scientific guesses) as to the outcome of experimentation. We’ll need a process that will be inclusive and still produce the best explanations for what we observe about consciousness. However, if consciousness is also evolving individually, indwelling, and cosmic, then reality is evolving and we may advance in progress to evolve language.
I hope that my comments are worth something, so, I did my best to live up to the commitment that I made and to give this program an honest look, to provide some notes for readers, and to give some useful feedback about it.
The panel conversation presents contributions, individual working experiences and views related to consciousness, exploring scientific theories, consensus about anything relating to consciousness, and attempts at an operating definition of consciousness with an eye on a non-dual view of consciousness… looking deeper into assumptions and conclusions of perceptions.
They present a program that discusses consciousness, yes. However, as the program moves along, we discover that the distinguished participants do not each have a solution for making progress that is agreeable.
Panel Questions (paraphrased and just briefly summarized with my notes):
Q-1) As we explore the hard question of science – what is consciousness… What is your working definition for consciousness (in your scientific work)?
Youtube Fast-Forward Question 1
Chris Fields begins the field focusing upon RAW (phenomenal) awareness… touch, taste, auditory, visual … giving emphasis to how people experience memories as distinguishing them from now experiences. I wondered as I listened if many even have an awareness of self or that some experiences occur in the present (moment) more so than others.
Henry Stapp recalls William James declares that ‘States of mind’ succeed each other. According to James: (1) Every ‘state’ tends to be part of a personal consciousness. (2) Within each personal consciousness states are always changing. (3) Each personal consciousness is sensibly continuous. (4) It is interested in some parts of its object to the exclusion of others, and welcomes or rejects — chooses from among them, in a word — all the while. I am not sure from the initial description what is causing joining of mind into matter.
Julia Mossbridge says that there is great importance in that our conscious experience and unconscious experience differ. Here she focuses initially on that our personal experiences of consciousness differ and that this is greatly important and reminds us that there is an importance to our experiences of “me, not me.” Stapp and then Almaas pipe in regarding states of consciousness “waking, sleeping, dreaming, enlightenment.”
Stuart Hameroff, not at all addressing the question, asserts that there are collapses (by the uncertainty principle) due to separation in underlying of space-time geometry instabilities that will self-collapse randomly entangling with the quantum ‘environment’ and without ‘history’ or ‘memory’ of occurring in whatever state, one or another, they manifest into these cease in time. In living systems he says, shielding from random environment occurs. He then describes a bit about this as an evolution process. He says in defining consciousness, “it’s kind of like pornography, you know it when you see it.” So, as it seems from Hameroff, consciousness with memory, meaning and causal behavior is ‘tied’ to living being and platonic (space-time) values orchestrate consciousness with wisdom. He qualifies that the source entity of consciousness space-time geometry (matter not being fundamental). I’m not sure but how matter and mind are being joined in the initial statements that Hameroff is making at around 21 minutes in the program. Stapp points out that personal values seem to be entering into the evolution (rather? from platonic values). Hameroff describes how he and Sir Roger Penrose determined that platonic values govern choices as predominant influences. He eventually explains that there is structure at the Planck scale to develop space-time fractal geometry. Hameroff finishes up his introduction saying that consciousness is driving the evolution of the universe.
Donald Hoffman begins in agreement that consciousness experiences are important and summarizes many of the previous points of the definition. He adds that for moving forward, the assumption that consciousness has a structure that can be mathematically described. He summarizes that space-time is a representation of some consciousness and that space and time are not at all fundamental. Essentially, he’s saying that space and time are useful for experiences and to reproduce – a species specific solution for living situations.
So, there are functions of consciousness that the panel describe. However, as Almaas points out, a fundamental universal definition for consciousness is not defined. A common understanding, so far, is that consciousness is active; doing… feeling for example, perceiving, experiencing, and thinking. However, that consciousness is a fundamental and underlying unifying spiritual medium of living is not agreed upon with scientists. Yet, apparently, there is agreement that consciousness may be a fundamental necessity for human life. [I’ll note here, none of the scientists specifically address consciousness that interests me; that is the consciousness that is me.] Julia Mossbridge indicates that using the term, here, consciousness is confusing. She says spiritual teachers are referring to something different from what the scientists are discussing. The scientists are talking about consciousness is the fundamental ingredient for experiencing – anything. The spiritual teachers are saying consciousness is the fundamental essence of life; one mind. Chris Fields points out that the core concept of physics is energy and that energy is an undefined term similar here to the way this discussion is going about what is consciousness. He says it may be that it must be left undefined.
Q-2) How is your research/work addressing “the hard problem of consciousness” to contribute toward understanding that?
Youtube Fast-Forward Question 2
Stuart Hameroff leads off this time. Mental states/events with phenomenal qualities or qualia are accessed via human experiences and these are organized into full rich conscious experiences. He relates this to an orchestra warming up. Each musician has been piping in random notes and then in concert, we hear them produce a whole beautiful symphony. He adds that an orchestra has a conductor but with consciousness that the brain must self-organize the rich experiences [I somewhat disagree]. Hameroff says, “You can have consciousness even without biology” [I didn’t expect that]. He said, “I believe that consciousness is a process on the edge between the quantum and classical worlds.” He mentions that molecular geometry may be involved in the process of giving rise to consciousness.
Henry Stapp introduced a complex function of change into this saying, “we are left with a fundamentally idea-like universe” as he describes how matter forms according to mathematical rules and this is well defined and predictable but when we get knowledge about the structure, changes occur based upon the findings and the new form is compatible with the information and yet evolved. This, he indicates, is similar to how an idea leads to changes based on the findings of how useful the idea turns out to be. He says “matter really behaved like an idea, and so, we are left with a fundamentally idea-like universe.” Stapp indicates later that it must be taken to be a fundamental fact that consciousness is there… as the essential fact, we must become accepting that the hard problem takes us further from materialist views.
Chris Fields says, “If we understand the hard problem as why is there any awareness at all and if the question is have we come any closer to explaining why there is any awareness at all, I would say the answer is no. I don’t think we have a theory, at all, as to why there is awareness anywhere in the universe [I agree].” He points out that scientific work is contributing towards what awareness does, why awareness is useful, under what conditions a system will be aware of a particular phenomenon (mathematics allow prediction) but not why there is awareness. He thinks that pushing ahead, that science will recognize that awareness must be a fundamental assumption. “We really do have to drop this business of awareness being generated by a particular organization of neurons, which is the standard view in neuroscience, or a particular of something else [material]. It became very clear in the early twentieth century that there aren’t any material objects. We all agree that there are objective boundaries around things. We believe that there is an objective boundary around me and around the lectern and so on and so forth. If you look at the formulas… those boundaries cannot be objective.” Modern physics and science of particles demonstrate that boundaries do not really nicely divide realities that we perceive via our physical senses. Physical reality is not really so much what Newton taught.
Julia Mossbridge: “I don’t know that I agree that out individual consciousness does anything….” She acknowledges that to her understanding that the questions put to science as “the hard problem” originating from David Chalmers is the wrong sort of tact for questioning for scientists to answer and that she didn’t think that science might ever get answers that are fully philosophical or theologically satisfying. There can be correlations of the brain to consciousness. She explains that since experimentation indicates that the past can occur after the future, this makes investigating consciousness not the most interesting question for a neural scientist. For a neural scientist, ordering things occurs in time in one direction. [I didn’t understand what she’d think is unattractive. The next part made sense to me.] She makes a distinction between that she has private observer awareness but that everything else of which she does not have conscious awareness is so much more… that consciousness for her is the awareness that she has as ‘the observer’ and everything else is part of her unconscious. [Interestingly, Almaas asks, “…but they are happening? Where are they happening?” Now, here is what is interesting to me… I don’t agree that what is unconscious for me is happening. That is in my opinion a delusion. I cannot agree that we are one if I cannot know you consciously. I cannot agree that I am part of this body if I do not know it consciously.] Julia’s point is well taken, I think to agree that I am not conscious of most of what is perceived as reality. [Thus, perhaps this brain that I am linked to by some awareness is making up reality mostly unconsciously because reality is not something that I can comprehend. This seems consistent with what we know about how the unconscious works. It makes a cohesive experience from what is in the awareness and then it fills in the gaps.] Now, Stuart pipes in making an example that consciousness can occur in the brain before a dilemma that gets solved by the brain and that we can respond correctly, yet unconscious of what has occurred as processed in the brain then as we respond correctly. [I’ll add here that I have read many stories about people saying that time slowed or even stopped while they acted to save themselves or a loved one or a pet. I agree that consciousness must therefore be able to place in the brain the correct information that the brain then can use and thus, it may seem as though time slows or even stops as the person acts on that was stored by consciousness in the brain even though the person actually records the event differently, as though time slowed down or even stopped for several seconds.]
Donald Hoffman wants a mathematical model of consciousness and to work from that to solve the hard problem. So, from there, with consciousness assumed, a given, science must demonstrate how we get useful consciousness laws out of our physical reality. What I do find in published works is more in line with what Julia Mossbridge suggests… for example, a paper entitled “Conscious Realism and the Mind-Body Problem” PDF seeks to explore relationship between biology and consciousness.
I mention (earlier, above) that this ‘hard problem’ is not well-stated as a question.
Almaas points out that spiritual teachings indicate that we must ‘know’ consciousness and that in the knowing, there is release from suffering—of human suffering—occurring; that happiness depends upon this.
Q-3) How is science going to address the human need to discover consciousness is essential for progress in successful living that eliminates suffering? Youtube Fast-Forward Question 3
Julia Mossbridge suggests the question for science ought not to be the hard question of consciousness, saying: “How do I bridge the gap between this fundamental duality of individual consciousness and everything of which I am [we—individually—are] not conscious?” Julia says that Almaas is speaking about a different consciousness. So, here we have the division. This being a conference of exploring non-duality, bringing into conference scientists is in dialog discovering that individual experience is something that we hold to dearly. Julia makes reference to ‘the one mind state’ as the unconscious.
A successful science of consciousness must address aspects of ending suffering. A successful non-duality that begins with idea that the universe and all its multiplicity are ultimately expressions or appearances of one essential reality must guide science. Where we are exploring the brain, our experience of consciousness, science is reducing its focus onto mechanisms. Where we are exploring the mind and consciousness, non-duality is advancing non-physical awareness.
Donald Hoffman says that a mathematical theory that describes consciousness will include in it surprises of the greater, as yet, unknown reality.
Stuart Hameroff pipes in that spiritualists tend to classify his works as materialist and scientists complain that it is mystical but that there are advancements in medicine occurring because his science is undertaking to include contemplation on the hard problem of consciousness. Microtubules have quantum resonant vibrations in megahertz and kilohertz frequencies and from qualia form by quantum microtubule vibrations inside brain neurons 1) conscious experience, and 2) regulate neuronal firings and synaptic plasticity. As synapses are formed, these are maintained and regulated by microtubules and the associated proteins. Hameroff gives examples of medical breakthroughs.
Where Hameroff considers the qualia primitive, Donald Hoffman pipes in to assert that neurons do not exist, at all, when they are not perceived; nor do microtubules or space and time. These are forms of perception.
Who is who? A.H. Almaas is the pen name of A. Hameed Ali, an author and spiritual teacher who writes about and teaches an approach to spiritual development informed by modern psychology and therapy which he calls the Diamond Approach.
Chris Fields is an independent scientist interested in both the physics and the cognitive neuroscience underlying the human perception of objects.
Henry Stapp is a mathematical physicist, known for his work in quantum mechanics and the place of free will in quantum mechanics.
Julia Mossbridge teaches courses in consciousness, cognition, perception and the influence of music on the brain. She is the CEO and Research Director of Mossbridge Institute, LLC.
Stuart Hameroff is an anesthesiologist and professor at the University of Arizona known for his studies of consciousness.
Donald Hoffman is Professor of Cognitive Science, University of California, Irvine.
So, it is a diverse panel and they are operating with a variety of definitions about consciousness. I didn’t take much time to accurately record the opening statements and some closing statements and their views are not mine, so, please listen carefully and make your own interpretations. I am not a fast typist so I left out much of what was said so I could keep on moving through this presentation. I may inadvertently have changed the meaning of what was intended… not on purpose, I surely didn’t do that. I’ll appreciate any comments on how I might improve this article… thanks in advance.
Additional video and other resources are found in the comments following this post.
Spiritual revelations relating to love, life and living life for love, and as being love.
Spanning over one thousand years, and three parallel stories, The Fountain is a story of love, death, spirituality, and the fragility of our existence in this world. The story occurs in three different time lines; 16th Century Spain, present day America and in the far future in the unknown of deep space. In all three times there is the character played by Hugh Jackman and a parallel romantic figure played by Rachel Weisz.
Tom (Hugh Jackman) experiences and re-experiences [meditatively] three simultaneous lifetimes; a quest for immortality and to save Isabella, his wife, the woman (Rachel Weisz) he deeply adores and loves.
As a 16th-century conquistador, Tomás searches for the legendary Fountain of Youth. As a present-day scientist, he desperately struggles to cure the cancer that is killing his wife. Finally, as a 26th-century astronaut in deep space, Tom discovers the inner experience of mysteries of life; love, dying, and the path to eternal joy.
In one sense, the stories all take place in the present and there is one “real” Hugh Jackman character, Tommy. The conquistador, named Tomás is the hero of the novel his wife Izzi (Rachel Weisz) is writing, and the spaceman named Tom Creo is the hero of that novel’s final chapter, a chapter that Tommy writes after his deathbed promise to his wife. Creo is Spanish for “I believe.” Spanish is a language the conquistador would speak, and from the stories inspirations, Tommy comes to believe that a cure will be found for death. The tree sharing the exospheric space bubble with Creo is the Tree of Life that Tomás sought in the early chapters. The spacecraft is en route to a nebula that Tommy and Izzy saw which was believed by the Mayans to be the place for the origins of life.
.
.
Darren Aronofsky’s “The Fountain” (2006) With cinematography by Matthew Libatique; following the graphic novel storyline. Youtube video link: “The Fountain” recut/remix .
The Fountain is a drama and a romance story. It’s an intricately designed and conceived work of science fiction. In my opinion it is a story of a meditation on existence. The story is of a spirituality awakening guiding subtle senses day by day on life’s quest.
In narrative terms each time is a journey in itself. However, the story is best understood as that all three ‘livetimes’ effectively occur at once with the beginning and the end of the stories in the quest being the joining to the central lifetimes.
As parts of the whole: The first lifetime is in Spain beginning the quest to find the tree of life, the second in modern times is central as a professional and personal race against time to find a cure for cancer and to stave off death by love, and in the third part an ambiguous and minimal narrative is experiential of the journey of an exospheric space craft containing the Jackman character and the tree of life as it is passing through a nebula toward the great re-birthing of a new cycle of now greater possibilities and expansion of the three livetimes.
All three times intersect with each other throughout the film. Although there is a clear and purposeful flow, it may seem disorientating, especially in the beginning. Get used to the rhythm and the pace and the time shifts and clarity emerges.
The film was in the making for about seven years. Aronofsky said that science fiction has been hijacked by over use of technology and he strongly wanted a film with psychedelic sci-fi when it came to The Fountain. Filming of future Tom and his exospheric space craft took more than four years for Aronofsky to perfect and he was quite proud of it finally. To avoid CGI effects, they photographed chemical reactions through a microscope for the elements that surround Tom’s ship. Linking the past, present, and future, many shots were re-rehearsed and shots were added and edited. This too was time consuming work of perfection. One element that is often missed is that the three times represent three spiritual revelations relating to love, life and living life for love, and as being love.
.
Isabella/Izzi/Isabel
In her past life, Isabella is the Queen of Spain. There, she is relying on Tomás, the conquistador, to find the Tree of Life. She believes that with it, she can stop the struggle for the throne between herself and a cleric who is attempting to take it from her. Isabella promises to wed Tomás when they return to Spain but Tomás never makes it back. .|
Tomás /Thomas-Tommy/Tom
Tomás is the past life version of Tommy, and a conquistador commissioned by Queen Isabella of Spain, the past life version of Izzi, to travel to the New World in search of the Tree of Life. Tomás fights hordes of Mayans until he gets to a temple. The priest protecting the temple stabs him, then realizes that he is carrying a ceremonial dagger that was given to him before. Tomás then passes and carries on to what he believes is the tree of life. He uses the sap to heal his wound, then drinks it. But, like the Mayan myth about the First Father told by Izzi, he gives birth to new life as vegetation sprouts from his body, killing him.
In 2500, future Tom is always with the Tree. It sustains him and keeps him alive. The bubble is his exospheric space craft for he and the tree, a means of transportation to get to the nebula, Xibalba, as the Mayans called it. He is going there to see Izzi’s life restored. But, moments before he arrives at Xibalba, the tree dies and Izzi appears to him. He finally realizes that they will be together again and accepts his death as the dying star explodes. The tree then blooms and Izzi picks fruit from it and gives it to Tommy, who plants it on Izzi’s grave in 2005; which is where the tree cycles about from in the film. This particular tree then is the symbol of enduring love throughout the linked lives and circumstances of these particular manifestations of Thomas and Isabel.
Also noteworthy, another interpretation is different. In it, Izzy is writing the story of the Spanish quest and she is unable to finish the story. Thomas picks up where she left of and evolves the links to the future, using his conversations with Izzy as inspirations for the story..
The Tree
In Tommy’s lifetime, after Izzi dies, he plants a seed on her grave in reference to a story she told him about how a Mayan’s dead father lived on in a tree nourished by his dead body buried beneath it. I believe that this is Izzi’s tree that Tom won’t leave, he continues to attempt to find a cure for death so that he and Izzi can be together again. As they make their way to the nebula that Izzi pointed out in 2005, the tree dies. Realizing that there is no way around dying, Tom finally accepts his death and realizes that he will see Izzi again.
.
Provided here (so far) also:
The Fountain Analysis
Time=9:17
.
Darren Aronofsky Director’s Commentary
Time=1:36:347
.
.
Image: An exospheric space craft vision with the tree of life is passing through a nebula:
.
Image: The tree of life is found:
.
Image: The exospheric space craft is a vision to carry the tree of life in preserving love in our memories:
.
Image: Queen Isabella commissions Tomás on his quest:
.
Image: Conquistador Tomás is receiving the commission for his quest
.
Image: Mortally wounded, Tomás is passed on as his future life enters to dispel the wound and receive the knowledge of eternal love.
Eric
the Hunt for Truth 