Why do I call them the ‘original’ and ‘middle’ states?
My entire experience is divided into two states: a state in which I am awake, and a state in which I am asleep. I call these awakenings and asleepenings, respectively. Or, the middle state and the original state, respectively.
If I were to plot these events in a linear fashion, they would look like a a sequence of awakenings, followed by asleepenings. Starting with birth, I have experienced an unending succession of awakenings, followed by asleepenings, and then awakenings. This will end in my death, as shown below.
In this linear conceptualization, every awakening and asleepening are unique.
However, I do not directly experience it like this. While my awakenings do feel unique, my asleepenings do not. Instead, during every asleepening I actually return to the same place. Re-conceptualized as a circular succession, all asleepening events are the same, while all awakening periods begin and end in the same place, as shown below.
I chose ‘original’ because, from the circular perspective, everything originates from this one ‘place’ that I return to during sleep. And I chose ‘middle’ for my awakening state because as a ‘place’ I return to, it happens in between.
I choose the least flamboyant, most mundane terms to explain my experience because it makes it easier to grasp and relate to. I could easily refer to my original state as my ‘creator’ or ‘god’ state, and my middle state as my ‘manifested’ or ‘fallen’ state. But those introduce additional connotations which I then have to account for in prayer and contemplation.
…