Looking Closely at Water Revitalization, I

Because of the cultural and scientific viewpoints of the natural world that have been developed and taught in recent history, the meaning of the phrase “water revitalization” is foreign to us.  It doesn’t fit neatly into the compartments available to it in our collective worldview, and because of that it is difficult to fully understand or appreciate.  Like any new concept that is introduced into our mental map of the world, we first seek to understand it in terms of concepts that we already know, but this can only provide a limited perspective of the new idea or phenomenon itself.

Water revitalization is not a concept that will be fully understood in one five minute conversation, a quick perusal of a web-site, or a what-can-you-do-for-me encounter at a trade show.  Just as it takes time to rebuild and regenerate natural systems, so it takes time for our minds to absorb and fully process the implications and ramifications of new ideas.  The introduction of a new concept often changes many of our previous concepts, though we seldom realize that immediately.  A new idea can frame all of our past ideas and conclusions in a new light, so that we see them from a new perspective, and this can often be very challenging to us.  New ideas may even call into question ideas we hold dear about ourselves, who we are, or our relationships to the world around us.

There are many words and phrases that have gained a foothold in our collective vocabulary that are related to the concept of water revitalization, but I think that generally they are an over-simplification of the real phenomenon.  As one example, it is increasingly common for people to make the attempt to reduce the concept of water revitalization to a particular geometric water structure, such as hexagonal water, or to relate it to a particular frequency of vibration or energy in Nature, as if there is perhaps one particular frequency, or handful of frequencies, that are critical.  This is the “magic bullet” idea, which suggests we can reduce complex systems and interactions to just one or two key parameters, which if brought under our control would take care of everything.  It is easy to form a mental picture of “good vs bad” water with these simplified models, but at the same time such simplifications obscure the richness of the natural processes at work in water.

Regarding water revitalization, Johann Grander once said,

“As a result of the many and various harmful influences, water today has lost its original purity.  Through water animation it is restored all the original information it needs to reconstruct its self-cleaning power and to get rid of the non-participating substances.  This is an intense process, which, of course, takes its time.  Nevertheless, in most cases, a certain change in taste and partly also in structure will be noticed immediately.

“Every further change to the positive depends on the initial quality of the water and on the degree of damage.  It is impossible to convert damaged water into pure spring water from one minute to the next.  The most important thing is to donate life to the water, so that it can again build up its own energetic power and consequently, it is enabled to fulfill its essential protective function.”

This one statement contains a wealth of important ideas to consider, ideas which Johann Grander has knitted together in his own understanding of water over more than two decades of personal research, experimentation, and reflection, but which tend to be foreign to the collective worldview of water most of us have been taught.  Over the next several blog entries we’ll look at this quote from a number of perspectives, and build upon it, in an effort to develop a fuller understanding of water, and this concept of water revitalization.

© 2010, Michael Mark