It is true that all creatures bear in themselves some consolation, as the comb produces honey. But the honeycomb, meaning whatever goodness there may be collectively in all creatures, that is altogether in God.
Many readers know I am a beekeeper; so I am familiar with the outer aspects of comb and honey. Yet there is an inner comb and an inner honey; and this analogy is quite precise. We might refer to Swedenborg's doctrine of correspondences, in which all things reflect properties of God, which they share in common not only with God but with one another. And this is indeed important; but without a specific explanation, it remains conceptual.
Our inner life is built, like the comb of bees, in a structure which has the capacity to be quite organized. Honeycomb, whether of the hive frame or freestanding, demonstrates an exacting order; it is a structure, much like the metaphysical ones posited by Ouspensky and Gurdjieff, in the sense that it is highly organized and designed to store something. In Gurdjieff's work the understanding of storage is expressed in accumulators and hydrogens, which a man is meant to ingest and retain; and the idea is ultimately yogic in every sense, since it clearly derives from ancient ideas about the ingestion and retention of prana.
The analogy of honeycomb is far from casual, since both the structural nature and the purpose of man's inner order are exactly like it. This esoteric truth has been preserved, in some ways, for thousands of years in traditions that liken the spiritual activity of man to that of bees; yet it is more than allegory, a fact which Gurdjieff's teachings provide a bridge to.
Humanity, in its ingestion of impressions, gathers their honey- the extracted nectar- into itself. I am required, here, to explain the precise nature of impressions and their relationship to honey in more detail.
Impressions are the nectar of Being. All Being emanates impressions, which are conveyed through various diverse channels, all involving either molecular vibration or photons. Without becoming too technical, it should be understood that nectar is, in flowers, that which attracts the pollinators; its nature as an an attractant is born of the essential sweetness of Love, which creates all things and is focused and concentrated by their Being.
Each individual act of Being, no matter what it is, is a flower of God's Love and concentrates and exudes its own nectar in the form of the impressions it emanates. (Eckhart's creatures—i.e., created things—all fall into this category.)
Consciousness is designed to collect and feed on that nectar; and just as there are innumerable types of flowers and bees, innumerable types and concentrations of nectar, there are innumerable types of consciousness. The nectar of impressions of Being and the nature of consciousness which collects them evolve together in lockstep, because the various systems and levels of consciousness are mirrored by the behavior of the biological structures which give rise to them.
So our own consciousness, like all other forms of consciousness, feeds on and stores (if it functions rightly) impressions in an inner "honeycomb," a storage place for all of the concentrated energy, the good things, the impressions, which are emanated by life.
The impressions we feed on are emanated strictly to attract us to the nature and manifestation of outer things, all of which are a direct expression of the good of the Lord; so impressions are actually of the Lord, all of them, and taking them in is actually a form of worship.
Tomorrow we shall investigate that in a bit more detail.