Viewing the viewing space as “MEN (a plane)” – please note that this does not mean viewing the viewing space as a two-dimensional plane. The viewing space includes the depth direction, so the “MEN (plane)” referred to by OCOT here means three-dimensional space. It implies that you observe your surroundings, a three-dimensional space, from a four-dimensional space since your gaze must exist in one higher dimension. 

  We usually think of our space as three-dimensional through the image of the x-, y-, and z-axes. So, if the “plane” in our field of view is the x-y plane, we tend to think that our gaze toward the world is in the direction of the z-axis. However, you should notice that such thinking is based on the assumption of placing your existence at a point in three-dimensional space. As I explained in detail in the previous articles, the space you are viewing forward is actually the world in the mirror. Suppose you are looking at an object/matter in front of you; you imaginatively position your eyeballs and head in front of the object/matter as if they all exist in the same three-dimensional space. You assume the position of “yourself looking at the world” and conceptualize the three-dimensional direction there. Therefore, the original self as a true image, the “front” or the perceptual front itself, does not exist in this three-dimensionality.

Wasn’t the true “I” a “matter” itself?

Then, why did the “matter” need to drive “I” outside of it?

   A matter cannot see itself. For a matter to see itself, it is necessary to create something that is not the matter, something external that can objectify itself as a matter. In order to create an exterior that objectifies a matter, two directions are necessary to emerge from it: an active force for the matter itself to go out to that exterior and a passive force for it to be observed as an exterior of the matter. Of course, the passive force here is the “I” position as a mirror image.

  The “I” does not know the matters’ origin. As a human being, “I” can only receive matters. Sometime after I was born, “I” realized that there was a matter in front of me.

　　However, on the other hand, the active force knows the origin of matters to some extent. Because it knows, it can overcome even the world of the matter itself and cross over to the other shore. In that sense, this active power is something that “I” on this shore can never touch. What exactly do you think it is?　Or, I should say, “Who do you think it is?” 

 It is “the Other.” Initially, the world was fulfilled only by matters. However, matters could not see themselves as matters. Therefore, they needed to externalize themselves. And there needed to be two roles to make it happen; one role that a matter pushes itself outward, and the other role that it is pushed outward. The role that a matter pushes itself outside was played by the being called “the Other,” and a mirror was placed there. Then, the “Self” was born in the mirror’s reflection as the matter that was pushed outside.

  And the “Self” identified with its mirror image loses its original space in its “front” and is trapped in the world behind, which is the reflection in the mirror of the Other. Thereby, the skin of the Self’s being as light speed is covered by its false “forward” gaze. At the same time, the world of matter itself has been transformed into a material object.

　In this way, “You,” i.e., the Other, always exists as the one who is beyond the matter to “I.” Whereas “I,” i.e., the Self, always exists in front of the matter, alienated from it and not yet entirely become into it. As I mentioned before, the relationship between these three is that of Orion (the True Human), Sirius (the Man of Spirit), and the Pleiades (Human).

Being a matter, itself was paradise.

Why did Adam and Eve have to be driven out of paradise?

　This complementary separation from matter in two different directions is relatively easy to visualize using the model of the intersecting cones (Fig. 9/ The viewing space of the Other facing to the Self and the intersecting cones) introduced on p. 380 of 2013: The Day God Sees God/Advanced Edition.

　　In this intersecting cone model, the relationship between the Self and the Other’s visual spaces and their pupils is represented by the skew relationship between the base and the vertex of two cones that intersect each other. With this model, we can regard the Self and the Other’s visual field space as a force superimposed from matter and the pupil of the Self and the Other as a force alienated from matter. The reason is that the pupil is the place we usually assume as our position in 3D space, and our perception of the pupil can only realize when it is supported by the visual space of the Other, as I have shown above. — I could go on and on.