Yes that’s very deep. RE: relating. It goes with something I have been working on for some time now: the way we think about reality in terms of relationship. The most basic relationship (almost: but the trick actually lies inside) has to be the relationship between two things, because one thing can not relate to itself. Sort of like the impossibility of dividing by zero. So let’s start with the relating of two things. For example, the relationship between man and woman, or even more generally, male and female (think “marrying and giving unto marriage”). It kind of has this rock bottom, inescapable dualism to it. And that dualistic nature of things can easily become the rock bottom truth of everyone’s reality. But it is actually here, at rock bottom, that the rock becomes most important. Because the rock may be a low thing, it may be so large a thing it goes away, it may be a thing as black and invisible as space itself, but it is without a doubt a thing, and it is the ground, or background, things, even a two-pronged thing like dualism itself, stand on.
Why does this matter?
Because as long as anybody in the cosmos is "marrying and giving unto marriage" to another body, these two bodies are lost in space.
Because any single body in space can not tell if it is moving or not relative to the blank space around it unless there is another body in that space (think of a planet hanging alone in the complete emptiness of space—no stars, nothing but blackness. It could be traveling at 60,000 mph or -60,0000mph in any direction, or not moving at all, or in circles. Who knows? The only way to tell if it is moving is if another planetary body is there). Now, there is still a major problem. Take these two bodies in space and ask this question: “Which one is moving? Is it both? Is it just one, or is it the other?” Because unless they are both moving at the same speed and direction, one will always appear stationary in relation to the other that is in motion. There is NO way to tell which in the reality of space...unless...there is a third object. Then when that trinity is there it becomes clear how the original two objects, at least, are moving relative to each other. And then it has a kind of a “majority rules” thing to it. As all trinities do.
Now. Go back to “marrying and giving unto marriage” or to the tigress that related with Cain, or to the “Sons of God and Daughters of men.”
It seems we are always forgetting something that helps us know where we are. Always getting lost without that third thing. Without that rock. And that lostness manifests itself in the constant directionless, endless process of either “marrying or giving unto marriage.” EVEN, and
maybe most clearly, in our actual marriages. It has that same endless, unknown “happening” to it, that forever disorients two bodies in space. A pushing and pulling. Neither body knowing exactly, but always assuming they know, which is doing the pushing away and which is pulling close. But there is this other thing. This place where all the constant marrying, the constant tensing and relaxing, can actually stop. And the two bodies become, each unto themselves, one thing, one flesh—but also the same thing. Not one wearing a black tuxedo and one a white dress, but both wearing something else—like a blue velvet mantle with a golden cross. There is a time when the destabilized orbits of wild and energetic electrons and protons might stabilize by the introduction of that neutral, in a sense, invisible, something else. Each thing then a unity unto the themselves, and finally to each other.