Demonstration

Ayn Rand once put into question whether ‘Perception is existence’, by this meaning whether it is necessary or not for an object to be perceived in order to exist. The reply to such a thesis would be, in short, that ‘Existence exists’, perception not being necessary to assert its quality of existence.

Yet, while perception is not necessary for the certainty of existence, existence imbues* perception. It is certain that existence first leaves a mark through perception, creating the concept of existence and furthermore, even the concept of the object perceived as existent. Additionally, and still unnoticed, is that existence has yet another effect,  that can be expressed as follows:  Existence imbues perception. It transforms the perceiver so that the essence of existence, the attributes of the ‘existant’ are transffered to the viewer. The more one gazes at something that exists and begins to understand it, existence in itself creates a liaison of transfer.

Explanation: The mind identifies qualities and wishes them for itself. Also, by observation, the mind discovers new patterns to which it has to attribute a meaning, a way of thinking, a reason. By observing existence new to its own self, the mind may discover new reasoning and might consider it better and thus would automatically assimilate it. Thus, existence changes the perceiver through imbuing.

Main point: If God is absolute existence, then perceiving God, which means staying with God, would enable changes such that it would confirm the idea that once in union with God, we will be entirely and surely changed so that we will become like Him. Perceiving God leads to getting to know Him, and understanding Him gives way to new reasoning which changes you. Thus Existence, in its purest form, can change entirely.

[From this it is not our intention to transmit the idea that we choose to change, even if we adopt the new reasoning. It is God still that reveals aspects that are new, he holds them available as Truth, which is within His Existence, and this Truth changes us, little by little. It is God who enables change, we merely accept it.]

Preemptive argument: One might ask if this is valid only for God, if other things in the world can change us if perceived, or even if Evil would be able to change us in the opposite way or at least counter the effect of God’s existence. The answers are multiple.

First, other things that are perceived change us if they manage to bring new reasoning. And if we perceive that reasoning as such.

Second, Evil as an imbuer can be answered to in two ways: first, the perception of God offers sufficient reason to reject Evil, let us say that it can be qualified as superior reasoning [although I have to mention that it only comes after sufficient and thorough understanding of God.]; second, there would be the point that people embrace evil more easily than good. It is because Evil needs not provide further reasoning, for it already exists within us and its adoption is merely an act of pursuing the already existent reasoning and deepening it. But Good as an absolute, being equivalent with God, as perceived being, is a new reasoning, not found in us and thus needs to be born within, yet once it is adopted, it is superior to the one already existent, otherwise it wouldn’t have been adopted, according to the previously exposed Explanation.

Note:

* we have used the word ”imbue” as a preference over ”impregnate”, believing it better depicts a process of fully assimilating an idea and total transformation. Imbuing changes the substance in itself, while impregnation merely covers and existing core.

to imbue=permeate: spread or diffuse through, soak: fill, soak, or imbue totally

to impregnate=fill, as with a certain quality; infuse or fill completely