Recently, some contemplation has led to a “shift” in perspective concerning what the phenomenon of “reading” (a person, a place, a situation) entails. This new “lens” has given a fresh angle for me to try and describe a process that ALL of life utilizes in various respects, which we then partake of in a special way through the uniqueness of our human individuality. While there may be more “barriers” to the allowance of such “reading” and “exchange” in some people, the “nuts and bolts” of things remains essentially the same in a general way.

Throughout every life experience and interaction, we are constantly interfacing with our surrounding environment. “We” are “packaged” as a distinct individual, and everything “outside” of us then becomes something “other” to “reflect” upon. The way in which we do so determines how we shape both ourselves and the environment/experiences we’re “entangled” with. In some respects, it is necessary and beneficial to act and perceive “distinctly” so as to navigate our 3D world. In other ways, the more we’re able to get “us” (our own specially individualized ego) out of the way, merging into the oneness that synthesizes all creation, the better able we’re able to transcend the “appearances” and temporal conditions of form with wisdom. In the “middle” of it all, there’s a “medium” that interprets the “exchange” between these oscillating layers in both a subjective and objective fashion. (We’ll come back to this framework from the metaphoric angle of 4 elements later…)

Before I get into the deeper conceptual “mechanics” of the process, let’s consider one way in which it goes on in a situation other that human—as an animal. Animals are “sensitive” to their environment in a very instinctual way. The pleasure/pain and fight or flight responses seem more or less embedded into the “program” of life. (Even plants “reach” towards a fulfillment of their “needs”…) The major difference between humans and other animals (in a general sense…) is that humans are largely more equipped to register life as a separately distinct ego and sense of self. Animals, on the other hand, don’t have a very distinct “identity” that they “hold” onto in their life for the most part. The core of their selfhood revolves around their body’s needs (food, shelter, etc.), while humans additionally define themselves on higher, and more abstract, levels of who “they” “are.” However, both animals and humans “make sense” of their environment and experience through a similarly constructed “perception apparatus” that is simply “tuned” differently.

Fundamentally, “reading” a person, place, situation, etc. involves quieting one’s self/ego, and wholly “listening” to whatever’s being “read” without “looking away,” “closing it off,” or defining it according to some artificially constructed standards. The more one is able to fully take in whatever the focus of their attention is offering without bias, glamour, or judgment, the more they are able to truly “know” it. One must be totally present with a person, place, situation, etc. to understand it as it is without incorrectly estimating it due to personal “obstructions.” Hence, the cornerstone of the process involves an openness to whatever may come, which is devoid of personal attachments to any beliefs or opinions that would discount what’s presented. Then, and only then, can the “presentation” be received.

When one is this open, one allows the “other” person to “bloom” and “unfold” and “flow” in front of them exactly as they are. The more one is in a state of “allowance,” the more an “other” is “allowed” to give of themselves freely, without also limiting themselves through our externally imposed limitation of off-putting judgments, condemnations, or disagreement. Therefore, a side effect of getting our ego out of the way also pertains to expanding the degree of unconditional love we’re able to offer and resonate. For one to be “not there” as an ego, but still solid, stoic, and cold (like a rock) does not invite or endear something or someone to put their essence forward. It is the absolute, underlying presence of unconditional love that we meet a person, place, or situation with that further allows it to reveal itself to us, as it is, without “holding back” or restricting the truth that it shows.

Essentially, these basics sum up the prerequisites for receiving the most complete impression about something in its own light of truth. Another factor at play, however, is that one can only “go into” another person, place, or situation to the degree of depth to which they’ve delved into themselves. The axiom of “know thyself” really is the foundation for furthering wisdom. The more wholly one is able to see, accept, love, and refrain from judging themselves, the more they are able to apply the same practice to what is outside themselves.

So, if we’ve gotten ourselves out of the way, and we’re open and loving, then how are we going about getting the “information” we obtain from our observations, and how are those observations made? For that, let’s go back to those 4 elements…

They’re what all simultaneously swirls together to make this whole “living wheel” spin, but different dispositions towards those “four corners” are what differentiate us all as unique beings. Humans have a “knack” for blending and balancing them in proportion together (with “flavorful concentrations” to individually characterize ourselves), while other forms may be more exclusively polarized to a more prominent degree. Let’s jump into a rundown of what these various “qualities” can be seen to pertain to:

Fire—This quality relates to Spirit (being) and the universal connectedness of All as One essential being. It is the “spark” of “knowing” that permeates all life instantaneously.

Earth—This quality relates to Matter (physicality) and the concrete presentation of some separately compartmentalized distinction. It is the “mold” of “form” that manifests in accordance with cause and effect.

Before getting to the other two elements, Water and Air, which “bridge the gap” between the forms of Earth and the energy of Fire, it is the first pairing discussed (Fire and Earth) that is most active in the “lower” levels of the animal kingdom. The Water and Air being esoterically less developed in other animals is responsible for their unique way of meeting the world in an immediately instinctual way. They are a part of, and animated by, the spiritual “fire” that directly links all life together as One being, yet they are distinctly individual forms born of “earth” that move about separately from other forms. Animals observe the world around them as they navigate their 3D environment, ever-vigilant for any signs of a threat or an indication that something may satiate a desire. The “instant knowing” of instinct will sometimes alert them to something separate from themselves that may pose a danger to their physical being, and such a “flash” could be seen as attributed to the “fire” that dwells within. We humans also have these fundamentally animalistic instincts, but other factors have grown more prominent, allowing us a wider variety of response and interaction. (As we are moving into an elucidation of Water and Air, it can also be argued and seen that certain animals may possess a greater degree of these qualities than others, but the extent of their influence is most noticeable with humans.)

Air--This quality relates to Mind (thinking) and the rationally objective articulation of concrete observances that relies on patterns and symbols as means of contrasting and communicating different facets of perspective. It is the “technique” of “discrimination” that organizes information into a particular order.

Water--This quality relates to Soul (feeling) and the irrationally subjective assimilation of ephemeral experiences that relies on emotions and memories as means of comparing and internalizing various phantasmagoric associations. It is the “sympathy” of “connection” that allows for the magnetism of attraction or repulsion.

It’s easy to suppose that animals just don’t have a mind or a soul and don’t think or feel, but that is not entirely true. Some advanced animals (monkey, elephants, dolphins, etc.) do exhibit reasoning abilities, and those same animals are known to retain experiences through memory and exhibit feelings. All living beings have a mind and a soul, but their extent may not be as (relatively) developed as our own. The complexity of symbols and tools they understand is not as versed, and their range of personalized feelings does not reach to that of our own. It would seem that as conscious beings, animals may be “growing” their attributes through their involvement with us as part of their own “learning” and evolution. Their sense of Self is not as distinctively defined as our own, as they are more collective in nature as a part of a “group soul,” whereas humans notably experience an “individualized” awareness of themselves as a distinct person. However, a larger truth also reaches in both directions, in that humans are also “plugged into” a human “group soul” (with multiple differentiations), and animals (and all “separate” beings) do have an individualized sense of self. The difference is all really a sliding scale along a spectrum…

Anyways, humans use these aspects of air and water prominently throughout all their various interactions and dealings. We use language to describe a phenomenon that we feel, and/or we generate feelings as the result of our intellectual understanding of something. Thoughts, opinions and beliefs that are “subscribed” to become a more crystallized part of our identity. Similarly, feelings and emotions that are “embedded” into our memories also shape the “package” that we call ourselves. These two elements of water and air “flavor” the quality of our individual self, expressed in a particular form of materialization that is simultaneously composed of a universally congruent energy. For that reason, they are constantly in flux when one is engaged with knowing the “brand” of any specific person, place, or situation. We connect with it through this medium of “liquid breath” in order to realize its composition.

Of course, the aspect of earth and fire are also going to inherently be at play when “reading.” An electric flash of insight may strike us with epiphany. The way something/someone looks, is made, or behaves will also tell us about it, and those two factors provide a wealth of both common sense knowledge and radical intuition. The water and air simply bridge and connect these so seemingly distant points.

On one level, air objectively analyzes a subject by facts, formulas, and tests that weigh and assess an expressed presentation according to what comes out/forth from it. In this way, air is linked to earth through an objectivity that serves to further differentiate something as being multi-faceted beyond just its form appearance, yet coming from it.

Similarly, water subjectively coalesces an object through desires, impressions, and feelings that attract and reflect a synthesized composite of what goes, and has gone, into it. In this way, water is linked to fire through subjectivity that serves to further integrate something as being more coagulated beyond just its spirit essence, yet coming from it.

This interplay “meets in the middle,” and a cyclic consideration of both qualities as they pertain to a person, place, or situation will fundamentally tell one about it. Again though, one must remember the initial premise that the ego of one’s individual self must be put aside in order to truly be able to “receive” any information/impression about another (anything) without distorting the truth about what its nature really is according to some personal bias, which may carry an excessively positive or negative connotation. Either way, if bias exists, we “miss the mark” of “reading” something/someone, not seeing it/them fully and clearly, when we interject some part of ourselves unduly into the perception. As such, to the extent that one does not “remove” themselves from the “equation,” they may simply find their way to people, places, and situations that resonate some connection to themselves on one level or another. This is part of the reason behind why many may find themselves reading for others dealing with comparative situations to themselves, or bearing other similar qualities to those they are familiar with. Even things that are “other” continue to retain some residual amount of “self” to the extent that oneself is still present in the occasion.

Eventually though, through practiced wisdom and applied technique, one perpetually sheds this sort of “attachment” until all impressions and information that are “not self” are able to come in as clearly as those that “are self” as well, and a fuller view of the expression being received can be seen. This also piggy-backs again off the notion of “knowing thyself.” The deeper one moves into themselves, the more expanded that concept of Self becomes seen. Our microcosmic experience and life contains a macrocosmic scale of implications that eventually encompasses everything imaginable, so the more we tap that understanding through ourselves, the more we are open to allowing it from others.

While we fundamentally may find some people primarily oriented towards the earth, only knowing by concrete appearance, and some primarily experiencing inner jolts of knowing that are far from concrete but powerfully accurate beyond question, we’ll also see some people leaning more toward the water, who emotionally construct impressions to then be dissected into ideas that can be objectively known, while others lean more towards the air, who intellectually deconstruct data to then be assembled into feelings that can be subjectively known.

Some classification may help. “Readings” involving divinatory cards/objects, astrology, numerology, etc. could be considered “air” based in that they essentially “start” with the structured “science” of some “language” of meaning, which then is personalized towards the subjective experience of someone, some place, or some situation. “Readings” that are considered to just be “psychic” or mediumistic would be more “water” based in that they essentially “start” with the unstructured “art” of “feeling into” some existing presence, which is then impersonally structured through objectively classifying and labeling those sensations into quantifiably and qualitatively understandable and communicable terms.

The more these two “streams” run together, the more possibilities for how information and impressions can be received, used, and transmitted. The words people say, or the thoughts that they hold, can all become interpreted in wider ranges of archetypal context that speak volumes beyond their limited, concrete meaning according to what patterns and connections are known to be present to one’s awareness. In the realm of one’s imagination or “inner eye,” a waterfall of images pertaining to some focus may flow and cascade, which reveal feelings, associations, or tendencies that are present. The more we, with our ego out of the way, open up to what something outside ourselves truly is, the more it’s able to present, show, and speak its truth in more and more ways that can increasingly be “seen” and “heard.”

In a nutshell, it is the continual interplay of these four elemental energies, which can also be discussed as two pairs of polarity, that make up the interface of our personal experience and how we experience others people, places, situations, and events. Pondering upon these fundamentals can continue to open new doors of perception into the phenomenon.

P.S. One friend of mine that I see as a primarily “water” reader initially obtains their impressions through the eyes of another. I just wanted to take a minute to analyze what I believe to be going on in such as case. When whoever said that “the eyes are the window to the soul,” it was more than just a cliché. Our eyes are an area of the body that are constantly receiving light, which (in some way) reflects and projects out to what is seen. It seems as though, while we all may look at some object and be able to see the same thing there, we may also project different perceptions onto it based on what its impression “bounces off” within us to project back out; what we think or feel factors into how we view something. (There is more going on with our eyes receiving and reflecting incoming light than we may currently understand, and “light” may encompass far more than we presently know.) As such, whatever we see, and however we see it, is our reality. That reality changes as we change within. However, throughout the process of “becoming,” we continually “stream out” the projections of who we are, which then bounce off our environment, which we’re also essentially shaping through the organic participation. When someone, such as my friend, is able to drastically put themselves, their ego, their opinions, their judgments, and their perception to the side, to essentially stop “projecting” out, then their eyes becomes whirlpools of suction which almost exclusively “take in” what other people, their environment, or some event is “broadcasting” without distorted it through their own self’s molding. The other person is this being more fully “received” without being filtered by the viewer and their expectations, allowances, fears, desires, etc. I expect we all have the innate ability to be fully present with others and ourselves, which this practice seems to essentially boil down to, but some seem to come in with a more preconfigured proclivity setup for such. And this, again, would seem to go back to those individuals having spent a wealth of time (in this life and beyond if one could imagine) delving into themselves enough to get themselves out of the way when the occasion calls for it… ;)