Category Archives: Electrical Reality

Sleepwalkers

We have taught ourselves to respond to certain neural patterns, and to ignore alternate ones that now simply operate as background activity. That background activity, however, supports a million forces: the neural stimuli that we accept as biologically real. Those other background stimuli are now quite difficult for us to identify, but they are always there in the [hinterland] of our waking consciousness, like dream chatter way beneath our usual associations.

n52

Neurologically, we tune into only a portion of our body’s reality and are ignorant of the great, tiny but tumultuous communications that are ever flying back and forth in the microscopic but vital cellular world.

Electrons in our terms are precognitive, and so is our cellular consciousness. Our body’s relative permanence in time is dependent upon the electron’s magnificent behavior as it deals with probabilities. The cell’s stability, and its reliability in the bodily environment, is dependent upon its innate properties of instant communication and instant decision, for each cell is in communication with all others and is united with all others through fields of consciousness, in which each entity of whatever degree plays a part.

n54

At one level our cells obey the rules of time, but on other levels they defy it. All of these communications are a part of the human parcel of reality, and they all exist beneath what we think of as normal consciousness. Events are not built up initially from physical particles. They are the result of psychological activity.

“In the beginning” we were only aware of that psychological activity. It had not “as yet” thickened itself into form. The form was there, but it was not manifest. I do not particularly like the analogy, but it is useful: Instead of small particles, we had small units of consciousness gradually building themselves into large ones — but a smaller unit of consciousness, is not “less than” a larger unit, for each unit of consciousness contains within itself the innate heritage of All That Is.

n3

We think of the conscious mind, as we know it, as the only kind of consciousness with a deliberate intent, awareness of itself as itself, and with a capacity for logic and the appreciation of symbolism. That only seems true because of our particular range of activity, and because we can only pinpoint events within a particular psychological spectrum.

Fields of consciousness in physics is called “energy and momentum,” not consciousness.

 

We cannot pinpoint “invisible” events

We can only locate or pinpoint an event that falls one way or another into the range of our perception.

dr10

We cannot really locate or pinpoint microscopic or macroscopic events with any precision. And cannot pinpoint invisible events, for even as our sophisticated instruments perceive them, they have not met them in the same time scheme. I want to deal briefly with such ideas, so that in later blogs we can discuss the location of the universe.

Any events that we perceive is only a portion of the true dimensionality of that event. The observer and the object perceived are a part of the same event, each changing the other. This interrelationship always exists in any system of reality and at any level of activity. In certain terms, for example, even an electron “knows” it is being observed through our instrument. The electrons within the instrument itself have a relationship with the electron that scientists may be trying to “isolate” for examination.

3310

Quite apart from that, however, there is what we will call for now the collective unconscious of all of the electrons that compose the entire seemingly separate event of the scientists observing the electron. In our range of activity we can adequately identify events, project them in time and space, only by isolating certain portions of much larger and much smaller events, and recognizing a highly specific order of events as real.

Light can be defined as a wave or as a particle, and the same is true in many other instances. Consciousness, for example, can be defined as a wave or as a particle, for it can operate as either, and appear as either, even though its true definition would have to include the creative capacity to shape itself into such forms.

dr13

We cannot pinpoint the beginning of the universe — for that beginning is simultaneously too vast and too small to be contained in any of our specifications. While everything seems neat and tidy within those specifications, and whole, we operate with brilliant nonchalance in the theater of time and space. Time and space are each the result of psychological properties. When we ask how old is the universe, or how old is the world, then we are taking it for granted that time and space are somehow or other almost absolute qualities. We are asking for answers that can only be found by going outside of the context of usual experience — for within that experience we are always led back to beginnings and endings, consecutive moments, and a world that seems to have within it no evidences of any other source.

The physical world as we know it is unique, vital to the importance of the universe itself. It is an integral part of the universe, and yet it is also quite its own reality. That reality is dependent upon the perceptions of each kind of life that composes it. It is a creation of consciousness, rising into one unique kind of expression from that divine gestalt of being — and the divine gestalt of being is of such unimaginable dimensions that its entire reality cannot appear within any one of its own realities, its own worlds.

dr44

Space, again, is a psychological property. So is time. The universe did not, then, begin at some specified point in time, or at any particular location in space — for it is true to say that all of space and all of time appeared simultaneously, and appear simultaneously.

We cannot pinpoint the location of consciousness.

dr32

When we are dreaming we cannot pinpoint our dream location in the same way that we can determine, say, the chair of the bureau that may sit on the floor by the bed in which we dream. That inner location is real, however, and meaningful activity can take place within it. Physical space exists in the same manner, except that it is a mass psychologically share property — but at one “time” in the beginning this was not so.

In the beginning, physical space had the qualities that dream space has to us now. It seemed to have a more private nature, and only gradually, in those terms, did it become publicly shared.

ee24

What was such a world like, and how can we possibly relate it to the world we know?

Dream world is an inner Universe

When I speak of the dream world, I am not referring to some imaginary realm, but to the kind of world of ideas, of thoughts, of mental actions, out of which all form as we think of it emerges. In actuality this is an inner universe rather than an inner world. Our physical reality is but one materialization of that inner organization. All possible civilizations exist first in that realm of inner mind.

dr17

In the beginning, then, the species did not have the kinds of forms they do now. They had pseudo-forms — dream bodies, if you prefer — and they could not physically reproduce themselves. Their experience of time was entirely different, and in the beginning he/she entire earth operated in a kind of dream time.

Forms appeared and disappeared. In our terms of time, however, the dream bodies took on physical forms. Physical reproduction was impossible. That did not happen to all of the species at once, however. For a while, then, the earth had a mixed population of species who had completely taken on physical forms, and species who had not. The forms, however, whether physical or not, were complete in themselves. Birds were birds, and fish fish.

dr0

In the beginning there were also species of various other kinds: combinations of man-animal and animal-man, and many other “crossbreed” species, some of fairly long duration in our terms. This applies to all areas. There were dream trees, with dream foliage, that gradually became aware within that dream, turning physical, focusing more and more in physical reality, until their dream seeds finally brought forth physical trees.

There may be other terms I could use, in some ways more advantageous than the term, “the dream world.” I am emphasizing this dream connection, however, because the dream state is one familiar to each reader of this blog, and it represents our closet touchstone to the kind of subjective reality from which our physical world emerges. The dream state appears chaotic, shadowy, suspicious, or even meaningless, precisely because in life we are so brilliantly focused in daily reality that dreams appear to be staticky objective background noise, left over from when we sleep. But that is how physical experience would seem to someone not focused in it, or inexperienced with its organization.

dr35

Again, the world came into being in the same way that any idea does. The physical world expands in the same way that any idea does. I am speaking for our edification of the world we recognize, of the earth we know, but there are probable earths, of course, as real as our own. They coexist with our own, and they are all in one way or another connected. Each one carries hints and clues about the others. In the terms used by science, there was no evolution in linear terms, but vast explosions of consciousness, expansions of capacities, unfoldings on the parts of all species, and these still continue. They are the inner manipulations with which consciousness presents itself.

The pattern of animal behavior, for example, is not at all as set and finished as we suppose. Out physical experience is a combination of dream events interrelated with what we call objective acts.

dr33

Were it not for our myths, we would have discovered no “facts.”

Proliferations of Consciousness

These imply some pretty fantastic abilities on the part of we humans — for such developments show that even though we live as small creatures within the incredible richness of an overall consciousness, or All That Is, still our actions can result in that great consciousness exploring new areas of itself. Quite awesome creative abilities on our part, and ones that unknowingly we take for granted. We do this all of the time, of course, individually and collectively.

p41

In the beginning, there was not God the Father, Allah, Zoroaster, Zeus, or Buddha.

In the beginning there was instead, a divine psychological gestalt — and by that I mean a being whose reality escapes the definition of the word “being,” since in it the source from which all beings emerges. That being exists in a psychological dimension, a spacious present, in which everything that was or is or will be (in our terms) is kept in immediate attention, poised in a divine context that is characterized by such a brilliant concentration that the grandest and the lowliest, the largest and the smallest, are equally held in a multi-loving constant focus.

p15

Our conceptions of beginnings and endings make an explanation of such a situation most difficult, for in our terms the beginning of the universe is meaningless — that is, in those terms there was no beginning.

The universe is always coming into existence, and each present moment bring its own built-in past along with it. We agree on accepting as fact only a small portion of the large available data that compose any moment individually or globally. We accept only those data that fit in with our ideas of motion in time. As a result, for example, our archeological evidence usually presents a picture quite in keeping with our ideas of history, geological eras, and so forth.

p17

The conscious mind sees with a spectacular but limited scope. It lacks all peripheral vision. I use the term “conscious mind” as we define it, for we allow it to accept as evidence only those physical data available for the five senses — while the five senses, of course, represent only a relatively flat view of reality, that deals with the most apparent surface.

The physical senses are the extensions of inner senses that are, in one way or another, a part of each physical species regardless of its degree. The inner senses provide all species with an inner method of communication. The cells, then, possess inner senses.

p66

Atoms perceive their own positions, their velocities, motions, the nature of their surroundings, the material that they compose. Our world did not just come together, mindless atoms forming here and there, elements coalescing from brainless gases — nor was the world, created by some distant objectified God who created it part by part as in some cosmic assembly line. With defects built in, mind you, and better models coming every geological season.

The universe formed out of what God is.

p44

The universe is the natural extension of divine creativity and intent, lovingly formed from the inside out — so there was consciousness before there was matter, and not the other way around.

In certain basic and vital ways, our own consciousness is a portion of that divine gestalt. In the terms of our earthly experience, it is a metaphysical, scientific, and a creative error to separate matter from consciousness, for consciousness materializes itself as matter in physical life.

p8

Our consciousness will survive our body’s death, but it will also take on another kind of form — a form that is itself composed of “units of consciousness.” We have a propensity for wanting to think in terms of hierarchies of consciousness, with humanity at the top of the list, in global terms. The Bible, for example, says that man is put in dominion over the animals, and it seems as if upgrading the consciousness of animals must somehow degrade our own. The divine gestalt, however, is expressed in such a way that its quality is undiluted. It cannot be watered down, so that in basic terms one portion of existence is somehow up or down the scale from another. It is all Grade A.

We limit the capacity of our conscious mind by refusing to allow it to use a larger scope of attention, so that we have remained closed and ignorant about the different, varied, but rich experiences of other species: They do appear beneath us. We have allowed a certain stubborn literal-mindedness to provide us with definitions that served to categorize rather than illuminate other realities beside our own.

p16

In the beginning, then, there was a subjective world that became objective. Matter was not yet permanent, in our terms, for consciousness was not yet as stable there. In the beginning, then, there was a dream world, in which consciousness formed a dream of physical reality, and gradually became awake within that world.

Mountains rose and tumbled. Oceans filled. Tidal waves thundered. Islands appeared. The seasons themselves were not stable. In our terms the magnetic fields themselves fluctuated — but all of the species were there at the beginning, though in the same fashion, for as the dream world broke through into physical reality there was all of the tumultuous excitement and confusion with which a mass creative event is achieved. There was much greater plasticity, motion, variety, give-and-take, as consciousness experimented with its forms. The species and environment together formed themselves in concert, in glorious combination, so that each fulfilled the requirements of its own existence while adding to the fulfillment of all other portions of physical reality.

p14

That kind of event simply cannot fit into our concepts of “the beginning of the world,” with consciousness arising out of matter almost as a second thought, or with an exteriorized God initiating a divine but mechanistic natural world.

Nor can this concept fit into our versions of good and evil. God, or All that Is, is in the deepest sense completed, and yet uncompleted. Again, I am aware of the contradiction that seems to be presented to our minds. In a sense, however, a creative product, say, helps complete an artist, while of course the artist can never be completed. All That Is, of God, in a certain fashion, now — and this is qualified — learns as we learn, and makes adjustments according to our knowledge. We must be very careful here, for delusions of divinity come sometimes too easily, but in a basic sense we all carry within ourselves the undeniable mark of All That Is — and an inbuilt capacity — to glimpse in our own terms undeniable evidence of our own greater existence. We are as close to the beginning of our world as Adam and Eve were, or as the Romans, or as the Egyptians or Sumerians. The beginning of the world is just a step outside the moment.

p3

I have a purpose in this blog — for this discussion — and that purpose is to change our ideas of ourselves, by showing a truer picture of our history both in terms of our immortal consciousness and our physical heritage.

A basic religious awareness has always been with mankind and womankind. Here are a few historical and mythological signposts of the intuitive understanding.
God the Father. There’s no way to assign any reasonably accurate date to when God the Father created all things, as described in Genesis, the first book of the Bible. (The Biblical account of Creation makes evolution an impossibility.) Nor can the date of Creation be arrived at by counting the Bible’s lists of generations, as given in the Old Testament, since these may well be incomplete.

Mohammed (A.D. 570?-632), the Prophet of Islam, stressed the uniqueness of the god Allah, whose name was already well known in pre-Islamic Arabia.

Zoroaster (628?-551? B.C.) was a Persian religious teacher and prophet.

Zeus was the supreme god of the ancient Greeks, who worshipped him in connection with almost every facet of daily life. He was the son of Cronus and Rhea, and the husband of his sister Hera. The Romans identified Zeus with their own supreme god, Jupiter, or Jove.

Buddha. This is the title given to Siddhartha Gautama, the founder of Buddhism. He was a religious teacher and philosopher who lived in India, probably from 563 to 483 B.C.

p47

2. I see correlations between the “flat view of reality” given to us by our physical senses, and the “flat” view of the universe that cosmologists perceive when they look way out into space. In his general theory of relativity, Einstein postulated that space can curve, and this has been shown to happen near the sun. Yet when scientists examine our universe of galaxies and clusters of galaxies, they see space as essentially flat, instead of curving in upon itself as it should over those enormous distances. Nor can the big-bang theory of the origin of the universe account for the homogeneity of a flat universe. The inflationary model can explain both the appearance of flatness and homogeneity — but, like all theories, it poses other problems that have yet to be resolved.

 

Desire to create out of joy, not from a sense of responsibility

Many if the ideas in my blogs will be accepted by scientists most dubiously, though some, of course, will grasp what I will be saying. It is of course very difficult for the deepest truths cannot be physically proven. Science is used to asking quite specific questions, and it usually comes up with very specific answers — even if those answers are wrong.

d11

“Wrong” answers can fit together, however, to present a perfect picture, an excellent construct of its own — and why not? For any answers that do not fit the construct are simply thrown away and never appear. So in a fashion we are dealing with what science has thrown away. The picture we will end up presenting, will certainly not fit that of established science.

However, if objective proof of that nature is considered the priority for facts, then as we know science cannot prove its version of the universe’s origin either. It only sets up an hypothesis, which collects about it all data that agree, and again ignores what does not fit. Moreover, science’s thesis meets with no answering affirmation in the human heart — and in fact arouses the deepest antipathy, for in his or her heart man or woman well knows his/her own worth, and realizes that his/her own consciousness is no accident. The psyche, then, possesses within itself an inner affirmation, an affirmation that keeps man from being completely blinded by his/her own mental edifices.

d12

There is furthermore a deep, subjective, immaculately knowledgeable standard within man’s or woman’s consciousness by which he/she ultimately judges all of the theories and the beliefs of his/her time, and even if his/her intellect is momentarily swamped by ignoble doctrines, still that point of integrity knows. That is the portion of him/her, of course, that is born and grows to maturity even while the lungs or digestive processes do not read learned treatises on the body’s “machinery,” so in my blog we will hope to arouse within the reader, of whatever persuasion, a kind of subjective evidence, a resonance between ideas and being. Many people comment, saying that they feel as if somehow they have always been acquainted with our material — and of course they have, for it represents the inner knowing within each individual. In a fashion, creative play is our human version of far greater characteristics from which our universe itself was formed. There are all kinds of definite, even specific, subjective evidence for the nature of our own reality — evidence that is readily apparent once we really begin to look for it, particularly by comparing the world of our dreams with our daily life.

In other words, subjective play is the basis for all creativity, of course — but far more, it is responsible for the great inner play of subjective and objective reality.

d7

With all due respect, psychologists, with the best of intentions, are barking up the wrong psychological tree. He/she are very enthusiastic about his or her value tests, and his or her enthusiasm is what is important. The nature of the subjective mind, however, will never open itself to such tests, which represent, more than anything else, a kind of mechanical psychology, as if we could break down human values to a kind of logical alphabet of psychic atoms and molecules. A good try, but representative of psychology’s best attempt to make sense of a poor hypothesis.

We may do what we wish ourselves (about taking the tests), of course, but our main purpose is to drive beyond psychology’s boundaries, and not play pussyfoot among the current psychological lilies of the field.

d4

Our body’s are responding, so let us remember that creativity is playful, and that it always surfaces when we allow our mind to drop its worries.

Whenever a blog is translated, it is almost impossible, of course, to say the same thing in the same way. My blog will always be expressed through those invisible national characteristics that are so intimately involved with language — and obviously, were that not so, no blog could be understood by someone of a foreign language. There are bound to be distortions, but the distortions themselves are meaningful.

d13

Now, a number of the world’s leading scientists in the physical disciplines have publicly stated their beliefs that basically consciousness plays the primary role in our world and/or universe. For reasons too complicated to go into here, this attitude prevails even with some mathematicians who seek to penetrate to the core of our reality as they understand it.

However, for every scientist bold enough to think this way, there are scores of others who vehemently disagree. For most scientific materialists only physical matter is real. For them consciousness is nothing more than an epiphenomenon, the passive by-product of the brain’s physiology and chemical events. They believe that physical death is the end of everything, that ultimately all if pointless. They derisively call their rebellious colleagues “animists” — those who believe that all life forms and natural phenomena have a spiritual origin independent of physical matter. (Such heretics are called “Vitalists,” a term related to animism, and one which also has a long history of scientific contempt behind it.)

d9

What can the materialistic scientists use other than mind — or consciousness, that poor epiphenomenon — to study and dissect matter? (Not to mention that innumerable experiments have proven that “physical matter” isn’t solid or objective at all, but “only” energy!) We have, then, the paradox of mind denying its own reality, let alone its importance. As far as we know, human beings are the only creatures on earth who would seriously engage in such learned futile behavior. It’s also very ironic, I think, that the materialists spend years acquiring their eclipsed education and prestige, both of which they then use to inform us of the ultimate futility of all of our endeavors (including their own, or course). But for the materialists, the mind-brain duality isn’t scientific in the orthodox sense. It isn’t falsifiable; that is, it cannot be stated under what precise conditions the mind-brain duality could be proven false. To which, understandably enough, those scientists who do accept the reality of mind reply that neither can the idea be falsified that only what is “physical” is real.

d5

I think is most risky at this stage in history for anyone — scientist or not — to dogmatically state that life has no meaning, of is a farce, or that attributes of our reality of which we can only mentally conceive at this time do not really exist. Discoveries in the “future” are quite apt to prove such limited viewpoints wrong. The history of science itself contains many examples of theories and “facts” gone awry. Moreover, why would our species want to depend upon as fragile a conception as epiphenomenalism through which to comprehend our reality? Or better yet, why does it in large part? Truly, our individual and collective ignorance of just our own probable reality is most profound at this time in our linear history (in those terms). I would be surprised is ultimately, as a result of mankind’s or womankind’s restless search for meaning, we didn’t end up returning in a new official way to our ancient concepts of spirit within everything, animate and inanimate. Such an updated animistic/vitalistic view would take into account discoveries ranging from sub-nuclear events to the largest imaginable astronomical processes in our observable universe. Human beings do know their own worth.

d15

There is no doubt that we need to believe that life has meaning. That belief may well be biological imperative. If we were as science maintains — only creatures formed by elements combining mindlessly in a universe itself created by chance, surrounded everywhere by chaos — then how could we even conceive of the idea of meaning or order?

d16

Science would say that the idea of meaning itself is simply a reflection of the state of the brain, as is the illusion of our consciousness. But a science that disregards consciousness must necessarily end up creating its own illusion. It ignores the reality of experience, the evidence of being, and in so doing it denies rather than reinforces life’s values.

 

Atoms are “processes” rather than things

The classical conception of the typical atom as being composed of a neat nucleus of indivisible protons and neutrons circled by electrons is largely passe, although for convenience sake we may still describe the atom that way. (In those terms, the one exception is the hydrogen atom, which evidently consist of but one proton and one electron cloud, or “smear.”) For the simple purposes of this blog, then, I’m leaving out considerations involving quantum mechanics, which concept repudiates the idea of “particles” to begin with. (And surely that notion involves more than a little of the psychic, or “irrational.” What a heretical thought from the scientific viewpoint!) But each atom of whatever element is an amazingly complicated, finely balanced assemblage of forces and particles woven together in exquisite detail — one of the more basic examples of the unending and stupendous creativity, order, and design of nature, or consciousness, or All That IS.

ee44

Through their work with particle accelerators, or “atom smashers,” physicists have discovered that protons and neutrons themselves are composed of forces and particles that in turn are almost certainly composed of forces and particles, and so on, in an ever-descending scale of smaller and smaller entities and concepts. Over 100 subatomic particles have been identified so far, and no one doubts now that many more will found. The existence of a number of still-undiscovered specific particles has been predicted.

Our scientists can count elements. That is, they will create more and discover more until they are ready to go out of their minds, because they will always create physical ‘camouflages’ of the real nonphysical thing. And while they create instruments to deal with smaller and smaller particles, they will actually see smaller and smaller particles, seemingly without end.

ee13

As their instruments reach farther into the universe they will ‘see’ farther and farther, but they will automatically transform what they apparently ‘see’ into the camouflage patterns with which they are familiar. They are and they will be the prisoners of their own tools.

Instruments calculated to measure the vibrations with which scientists are familiar will be designed and redesigned. All sorts finally of seemingly impossible phenomena will be discovered with these instruments, until the scientists realize that something is desperately wrong. The instruments will be planned to catch certain camouflages, and since they will be expertly thought out they will perform their function. I do not want to get too involved. However, by certain means the instruments themselves will transform data from terms that we cannot understand into.

ee42

Some of the “particles’ the theoretical physicists have discovered — and/or created — in their gigantic particle accelerators have unbelievably short life-spans in our terms, vanishing, it seems, almost before they’re born. I like to think of such research from the particle’s point of view, though, a consideration I haven’t seen mentioned in the few scientific journals I have read. The merest particle is basically conscious in its own way. Mesons are classes of particles produced from the collisions of protons. Did a meson, for example, choose to participate in an atom-smashing experiment in order to merely peek in on our gross physical reality for much less than the billionth of a second if exists with that identity, before it decays into electrons and photons? From its viewpoint, our reality might be an incomprehensible to it as its reality is to us — yet the two inevitably go together.

In it way the meson may have all of the “time” it needs, or wants. It may look upon our world as one frozen or motionless, upon other subatomic particles as very slow-moving indeed, or even faster than it is. (As far as “time” goes, some particles live for far less than a trillionth of a second.”) I’m quite sure, however, that the meson, or any short-lived particle, searches out its own kind of value fulfillment while here with us. Probable realities, which I haven’t even mentioned, must be deeply involved also.

ee22

And of course there are all sorts of motion, some of them very stable, if still incomprehensible to us. But whereas the meson vanishes from our view after its exceedingly brief existence, the electron has an “infinite” life-span. Think of the unending varieties of value fulfillment it explores in just our world alone! Talk about motion: The average electron orbits its atomic nucleus about a million times each billionth of a second (or nanosecond).

Electromagnetic energy units (or units of consciousness), these nonphysical entities — and many others of a like nature — are emanations of consciousness, or All That Is, and in “size” rank far below the tiniest particles ever observed in atom smasher. Each unit of consciousness contains within itself innately infinitely infinite properties of expansion, development and organization; yet within itself always maintains the kernel of its own individuality. It is aware energy, not personified but awarized.

ee18

The varieties of consciousness — the inner psychological particles, the equivalent, say, of the atom or molecule, or proton, neutron or quark — those nonphysical, ‘charmed,’ ‘strange,’ forms of consciousness that make experience go up or down, and all around and around — are never of course dealt with by science.

ee52

If physical form is made up of such multitudinous, invisible particles, how much more highly organized must be the inner components of consciousness, without whose perceptions matter itself would be meaningless. The alliances of consciousness, then, are far more vast than those of particles in any form.

The Now Beginning

In terms of our equations, energy and consciousness and matter are one. And in those terms (the qualifications are necessary) — consciousness is the agent that directs the transformation of energy into form and if form into energy. All possible visible or invisible particles that we discover or imagine — meaning hypothesized particles — possess consciousness. They are energized consciousness.

b1

There are certain characteristics inherent in energy itself, quite aside from any that we ascribe to it, since of course to date we do not consider energy conscious.

Energy is above all things infinitely creative, innovative, original. Energy is imaginative. (Any scientists who might be reading this blog may as well stop here.) I am not assigning human traits to energy. Instead, our human traits are the result of energy’s characteristics — a rather important difference. Space as we think of it is, in our terms, filled with invisible particles. They are the unstated portion of physical reality, the un-manifest medium in which our world exists. In that regard, however, atoms and molecules are stated, though we cannot see them with our [ unaided ] eye. The smaller particles that make them up become “smaller and smaller,” finally disappearing from the examination of any kind of physical instrument, and these help bridge the gap between un-manifest and manifest reality.

b2

For the terms of this discussion of the beginning of our world, I will deal with known qualities for now — the atoms and molecules. In the beginning they imagined the myriad of forms that were physically possible. They imagined the numberless cells that could arise from their own cooperative creation. Energy is boundless. It is exuberant. It knows no limits. In those terms, the atoms dreamed the cells into physical being — and from that new threshold of physical activity cellular consciousness dreamed of the myriad organizations that could emerge from this indescribable venture.

Again, in actuality all of this took place at once, yet the depth of psychological experience contained therein can never be measured, for it involved a kind of value fulfillment with which each consciousness is involved. That characteristic of value fulfillment is perhaps the most important element in the being of All That Is, and it it a part of the heritage of all species.

b32

Value fulfillment itself is most difficult to describe, for it combines the nature of a loving presence — a presence with the innate knowledge of its own divine complexity — with a creative ability of infinite proportions that seeks to bring to fulfillment even the slightest, most distant portion of its own inverted complexity. Translated into simpler terms, each portion of energy is endowed with an inbuilt reach of creativity that seeks to fulfill its own potentials in all variations — and in such a way that such a development also furthers the creative potentials of each other portion of reality.

In those terms, then, there was in the beginning an almost unimaginable time in which energized consciousness, using its own creative abilities, its own imagination, experimented with triumphant rambunctiousness, trying out one form after another. In those terms we are used to thinking of, nothing was stable. Consciousness as we think of it turned into matter, and then into pure energy and back again.

b24

Subjectivity still largely ruled. Like an adolescent leaving home for the first time, individualized consciousness was also somewhat homesick, and returned often to the family homestead — but gradually gained confidence and left finally to form a universe.

Now because All That IS contains within itself such omnipotent, fertile, divine creative characteristics, all portions of its subjective experience attained dimensions of actuality impossible to describe. The thoughts, for example, of All That Is were not simply thoughts as we might have, but multidimensional mental events of superlative nature. Those events soon found that a transformation must occur, if they were to journey into objectivity — for no objectivity of itself could contain the entire reality of subjective events that existed within divine subjectivity. Only in that context could their relative perfection be maintained. Yet they had yearned before the beginning for other experiences, and even for fulfillment of a different nature. They sensed a kind of value fulfillment that required of them the utilization of their own creative abilities. They yearned to create as they had been created, and All That Is, in a kind of divine perplexity, nevertheless realized that his had always been its own intent.

b31

All That IS realized that such a separation would also allow us to bring about a different kind of divine art, in which the creators themselves created, and their creations created, bringing into actuality existences that were possible precisely because there would seem to be a difference between the creator and the creations. All That Is is, therefore, within each smallest portion of consciousness.

Yet each smallest portion of consciousness can uniquely create, bring into being, eccentric versions of All That Is, that in certain terms All That Is, without that separation, could not otherwise create. The loving support, the loving encouragement of the slightest probable consciousness and manifestation — that is the intent of All That Is.

b5

All That Is knows that even this purpose is a portion of a larger purpose. In terms of time, the realization of that purpose will emerge with another momentous explosion of subjective inspiration into objectivity, or into another form. In deeper terms, however, that purpose is also known now, and to one extent or another the entire universe dreams of it, as once cellular consciousness dreamed of the organs that it might “form.”

b22

I want to stress that I am speaking here not so much about a kind of spiritual evolution as I am about an expansion. We will for now, however, confine ourselves to discussion of consciousness in the beginning of the world, stressing that the first basis of physical life was largely subjective, and that the state of dreaming not only helped shape the consciousness of our species, but also in those terms served to provide a steady source of information to man and woman about his/her physical environment, and served as an inner web of communication among all species.

 

The year 2020, and the idea of time and of dates seems to be indelibly mixed into everyone’s psychology

We can remember last year, and to some extent recall the past years of our lives. It appears to us that our present consciousness wanders backward into the past, until finally we can remember no longer — and on a conscious level, at least, we must take the very event of our birth under secondhand evidence. Few people have conscious memory of it.

For the purpose of our discussion, I must necessarily couch this blog to some degree in the framework of time. I must honor our specifics. Otherwise my blog readers would not understand what I am trying to say.

z34

Even though this blog is being written within time’s tradition, therefore, I must remind you that basically that tradition is not mine — and more, basically, it is not yours either.

In the deepest of terms, and in ways that quite scandalize the intellect when it tries to operate alone, the beginning is now. That critical explosion of divine subjective into objectivity is always happening, and we are being given life “in each moment” because of the simultaneous nature of that divine subjectivity.

z32

I hope that in other portions of my blogs certain mental exercises will allow us to leap over the tradition of time’s framework and sense with the united intellect and intuitions our own individual part in a spacious present that is large enough to contain all of time’s segments.

Assuming that the big-bang origin of the universe was a hot event

Theoretical physicists have charted how the first explosion may have ” evolved” from one with temperature well in excess of 100,00 million degrees Kelvin into a cooler one of “only” a few thousand degrees Kelvin around 500,000 years later, so that atoms could begin to form.

sl21

One less prominent theory The “inflationary model,” which may become much better known. It incorporates many of the features of the big-bang theory, and actually may answer certain questions in a better scientific fashion. One of the big differences between the two is that in the big-bang theory all of matter in the universe was already present, though existing in an extremely dense state which then began to expand; the inflationary model suggests that the universe was created out of nothing, or out of just about nothing — meaning that through unforeseeable rhythms sub-atomic particles spontaneously came into being as matter. A fantastic, inflationary expansion then began. Yet this creation of matter out of nothing, so to speak, violates at least some of the laws of conservation — laws that are indeed among the most basic and chemical tenets of physics.

sl14

I don’t necessarily believe in either the big-bang or inflationary models of the creation of the universe, even though material in my blogs may be evocative of portions of both theories. In physics, we’re asked to believe that this “extremely dense state” which began to expand was in actuality many billions of times smaller than a proton. (Protons are subatomic components of the nuclei of atoms.) Matter is a form of energy. Even so, I have trouble conceptualizing the idea that all matter in our universe, out to the farthest-away galaxy of billions of stars, grew from this unimaginably small and dense, unimaginably hot “original” state or area of being. I can see how such a concept can be postulated mathematically — but could it ever have really happened in ordinary terms?

Imagine a body with a fully operating body consciousness

A body not diseased or defective, but without the overriding ego-directed consciousness that we have. The sleepwalker’s physical abilities surpassed ours. They were as agile as animals, their purpose simply to be. Their main points of consciousness were elsewhere, their primary focuses scarcely aware of the bodies they had created. Yet they learned ‘through experience,’ and began to ‘awaken,’ to become aware of themselves, to discover time, or to create it.

sl1

The sleepwalkers were not asleep to themselves, only from our viewpoint. There were several such races of human beings. To them the real was the dream life, which contained the highest stimuli. This is the other side of our own experience. Such races left the physical earth much as they found it. In what we would call the physical waking state, these individuals slept, yet they behaved with great natural physical grace. They did not saddle the body with negative beliefs of disease or limitation. They did not age to the extent that we do.

The creationists put down other species, as the evolutionist

I’d say that both the creation and evolution models suffer from logical and emotional sloppiness, and that neither one presents a reasonable view of man’s or woman’s origins. Both concepts seem equally implausible when we think of them with any objectivity, and neither can be proven, of course. They ultimately rest upon the faith of the believer.

z24

We cannot prove scientifically that our world was created by a god who set in into motion, but remained outside of its dominion. Nor can we prove scientifically that the creation of the world was the result of a chance occurrence — so we will not be able to prove what I am going to tell you either. Not in usual terms.

I hope however to present, along with my explanations, certain hints and clues that will try to arouse within our own consciousnesses memories of events with which our own inner psyches were intimately involved as the world was formed — and though these may appear to be past events, they are even now occurring.

z31

Before the beginning of the universe, we will postulate the existence of an omnipotent, creative source. We will hope to show that this divine subjectivity is as present in the universe. I refer to this original subjectivity as All That Is. I am making an attempt to verbalize concepts that almost defy the edges of the intellect, unless that intellect is thoroughly reinforced by the intuition’s strength. So you will need to use your mind and your own intuitions as you read this blog.

All that is, before the beginning contained within itself the infinite thrust of all possible creations. All That Is possessed creativity of such magnificence that its slightest imaginings, dreams, thoughts, feelings or moods attained a kind of reality, a vividness, an intensity, that almost demanded freedom. Freedom from what? Freedom to do what? Freedom to be what?

z33

The experience, the subjective universe, the “mind” of All That Is, was so brilliant, so distinct, that All That Is almost became lost, mentally wandering within this ever-flourishing, ever-growing interior landscape. Each thought, feeling, dream, or mood was itself indelibly marked with all of the attributes of this infinite subjectivity. Each glowed and quivered with its own creativity, its own desire to create as it had been created.

Before the beginning there existed an interior universe that had no beginning or ending, for I am using the term “before the beginning” to make matters easier for the reader to assimilate. The same infinite interior universe exists now, for example.

z51

All That Is contained within itself the knowledge of all existences, with their infinite probabilities, and “as soon as” All That Is imagined those numberless circumstances, they existed in what I will call divine fact.

All that is knew of itself only. It was engrossed with its own subjective experiences, even divinely astonished as its own thoughts and imaginings attained their own vitality, and inherited the creativity of their subjective creator. Those [thoughts and imaginings] began to have a dialogue with their “Maker”

z7

Thoughts of such magnificent vigor began to think their own thoughts — and their thoughts thought thoughts. As if in divine astonishment and surprise, All That Is began to listen, and began to respond to these “generations” of thoughts and dreams, for thoughts and dreams related to each other also. There was no time, so all of this “was happening” simultaneously. The order of events is being simplified. In the meantime, then in our terms. All That Is spontaneously thought new thoughts and dreamed new dreams, and became involved in new imaginings of interweaving and interrelating thoughts and dreams that “already” existed.

So beside this spontaneous creation, this simultaneous “stream” of divine rousing. All That Is began to watch the interactions that occurred among his own subjective progeny. He listened, began to respond and to answer a thought or a dream. He began to purposefully bring about those mental conditions that were requested by these generations of mental progeny. If he had been lonely before, he was no longer.

z8

Our language cause some difficulty here, so please accept the pronoun “he” as innocuously as possible. “It” sounds too neutral for my purpose, and I want to reserve the pronoun “she” for later differentiations. In basic terms, of course, All That Is is quite beyond any designations having to do with anyone species or sex. All That Is, then, began to feel a growing sense of pressure as it realized that its own ever-multiplying thoughts and dreams themselves yearned to enjoy those greater gifts of creativity with which they were innately endowed.

It is very difficult to try to assign anything like human motivation to All That Is. I can only say that it is possessed by “the need” to lovingly create from its own being; to lovingly transform its own reality in such a way that each most slight probable consciousness can come to be; and with the need to see that any and all possible orchestrations of consciousness have the chance to emerge, to perceive and to love.

z23

We will later in future blogs discuss fuller connotations of the word “love” as it is meant here, but this blog is a kind of outline of other material to come.

All That Is, then, became aware of a kind of creative tumult as each of its superlative thoughts and dreams, moods and feelings, strained at the very edges of their beings, looking for some then-unknown, undiscovered, as of then unthought-of release. I am saying that this mental progeny included all of the consciousnesses that have ever appeared or will appear upon our earth — all tenderly couched: the first human being, the first insect — each with an inner knowledge of the possibilities of its development. All That Is, loving its own progeny, sought within itself the answer to this divine dilemma.

z44

When that answer came, it involved previously unimaginable leaps of divine inspiration, and it occurred thusly: All that Is searched through the truly infinite assortment of its incredible progeny to see what conditions were needed for this even more magnificent dream, this dream of a freedom of objectivity. What door could open to let physical reality emerge from such an inner realm? When All That Is, in our terms, put all of those conditions together it saw, of course, in a flash, the mental creation of those objective worlds that would be needed — and as it imagined those worlds, in our terms, they were physically created.

All That Is did not separate itself from those worlds, however, for they were created from its thoughts, and each one has divine content. The worlds are all created by that divine content, so that while they are on the one hand exterior, they are on the other also made of divine stuff, and each hypothetical point in our universe is in direct contact with All That Is in the most basic terms. The knowledge of the whole is within all of its parts — and yet All That Is is more than its parts.

z52

Divine subjectivity is indeed infinite. It can never be entirely objectified. When the worlds, ours and others, were thus created, there was indeed an explosion of unimaginable proportions, as the divine spark of inspiration exploded into objectivity.

The first “object” was an almost unendurable mass, though it has no weight, and it exploded, instantaneously beginning processes that formed the universe — but no time was involved. the process that we might imagine took up eons occurred in the twinkling of an eye, and the initial objective materialization of the massive thought of All That Is burst into reality. In our terms this was a physical explosion — but in the terms of the consciousnesses involved in that breakthrough, this was experienced as a triumphant “first” inspirational frenzy, a breakthrough into another kind of being.

z53

The earth then appeared as consciousness transformed itself into the many facets of nature. The atoms and molecules were alive, aware — they were no longer simply a part of a divine syntax, but they spoke themselves through the very nature of their being. They became the living, aware vowels and syllables through which consciousness could form matter.

But in our terms this was still largely a dream world, though it was fully fashioned. It had, generally speaking, all of the species that we now know. These all correlated with the multitudinous kinds of consciousnesses that had clamored for release, and those consciousnesses were spontaneously endowed by All That Is with those forms that fir their requirements. We had the birth of individualized consciousness as we think of it into physical context. Those consciousnesses were individualized before the beginning, but not manifest. But individualized consciousness was not quite all that bold. It did not attach itself completely to its earthly forms at the start, but rested often within its “ancient” divine heritage. In our terms, its is as if the earth and all of its creatures were partially dreaming, and not as focused within physical reality as they are now.

z46

For one thing, while individualized consciousness was within the massive subjectivity of All That IS, it enjoyed, beside its own uniqueness, a feeling of supporting unity, a comforting knowledge that it was its source. So in the beginning of our world, consciousness fluctuated greatly, focusing gently at the start, but not quite as willing to be as fully independent as its first intent might seem.

We had the sleepwalkers, early members of our species, whose main concentration was still veiled in that earlier subjectivity, and they were our true ancestors, in those terms.

z38

For one thing, early man and woman needed to rely upon his or her inner knowledge.