The fundamental nature of consciousness is experiential.
There's an interview snippet in which Jung speaks of telepathic events' demonstrating that consciousness is unbound by time and space. This puts in mind the experiential, quantum state of entangled particles - a relationship also unbound by time and space.
As awareness focuses attention on a photon, a cloud of probable states will collapse into a manifestation which may be perceived as a particle. Observation alters the experience.
...
And, just tonight, in a virtual shamanic circle, we received this wisdom:
Loving one's fellow humans - and all creation - isn't a "command", its what our hearts - our souls - are doing, all the time. Conflict may impede it, emotions may confuse it and disappointment & fear may choke it down to a trickle, but nothing can completely stop our natural, ecstatic expression of love and gratitude.
"We're all here on earth to help others. What on earth the others are here for I don't know."
Jung's view on the deep psyche / nontemporal / nonlinear self is a trip. Man was so ahead of his time it's nuts.
Love the Auden quote. And the realization from circle. Thanks for sharing. Yes - there is a natural state, and then there's everything going on on top of it which distracts us from feeling it. Thank god for practices which drive us back down to the true state :-)
LOVE THAT: "We can self-examine, think critically, and become fully honest with ourselves and the world as a result." And I agree, if we win this out within ourselves, the world is safe.
Not having had any contact with you since you were a very young girl, I am happily surprised to encounter from your hand such a brilliant piece of writing. Of course, my “surprise” is understandable, if not silly, given that you have matured and grown into a perceptive woman, with many years of learning and much experience of living since last I saw you.
This piece on mysticism is very well done, in my opinion. Very clear, very direct, very insightful. Mysticism, or gnosis, is quite simply, as you say, "direct experience of the divine," or, in my path's parlance, direct, unmediated experience of true nature, or Being.
Many of the turns of phrase in your writing are striking and quotable, again, in my opinion. (E.g., “It’s all at once personal and the least personal—that is, of the highest order—game in town. It’s both everlasting and emergent, in and of . . . “; “mysticism is a by-product of paying close, courageous, unabashed attention to life”; and “Mysticism is about cultivating a living, breathing relationship with something wholly other inside of you.”)
As a long-time practitioner of “paying close, courageous unabashed attention to life” as life manifests in the present moment, and this moment, and this moment, and so forth, I can attest to the truth of your words. The view that you speak from in this post tells me that you, too, are a practitioner and have had many and repeated direct experiences of what I will call essential presence, which is known in my path’s teaching as the true nature of the soul.
I note your interest in autonomy and am not surprised to find it here, because all deep experiences with essential presence, or the divine, will lead eventually to the question, Who am I? I appreciate what you have written here, and acknowledge that autonomy can be a thorny subject, especially here in America (which you reference) where autonomy, or independence, is valued so highly.
Given your interest in the topic, I think you might enjoy and find relevant to the inquiry on autonomy one of my teacher’s books "The Pearl Beyond Price: Integration of Personality Into Being, an Object Relations Approach," by A.H. Almaas, especially chapters 3 & 4. To whet your appetite, here is a quote from chapter 4:
“Now, we can understand in a deeper way the autonomy of Being. From the perspective of Being, what we are is not determined by either the past or the present situation. We are not a reaction; we simply are, an essential existence, totally free from the past. Our nature, our identity, cannot be influenced by situations. The main difference between Being and ego—which is that Being is just being-as-such and ego a reaction from the past—makes Being the true autonomy, and ego autonomy a delusion.”
I’m glad you have found an outlet for the creative and intelligent expression of your learning and insight. It’s fun and satisfying to meet you again in this way!
Doug! What a delight to feel you here in this space. And all inspired by my words, no less! Big smiles.
Thank you for the reflection, compliments, and shared experience. I can see I come by my ideas honestly, being that you're at least some part of where I came from. It's very cool to read about your own travels & insights. Thank you, again, for sharing them.
Thanks, also, for the bit from Almaas. I've encountered his work a handful of times over the years, but haven't immersed myself in it. From that passage you quoted, I can certainly feel a resonance. The brilliance of the autonomous self is quite... powerful, no? My only issue is with pitting the ego against Being, as in my experience, we actually need to have a really stellar, healthy connection to our egos in order to explore any of these realms. The ego is not the enemy, only the defense of it at the expense of all other experience is.
Anyway, great to "see" you here & converse a bit. Thanks for your wisdom.
A quick note. Almaas does not in any way, shape or form teach to work against the ego, for not only do we need a healthy ego to move beyond it, but also, the ego is part of ourselves, so to fight it is to prolong the inner fight, the inner conflict that alone separates us and our experience from Being. So whatever you heard in the quoted material that led you to conclude Almaas recommends fighting the ego isn't there. What he wants us to see is that autonomy on the ego level is not autonomy on the essential level - that they are too very different experiences.
hey doug. you're totally write. i was reading hastily & interpreted some of his phrasing lazily. of course he's got his head on his shoulders & knows what he's talking about! ;-) important distinction, too - autonomy of ego vs. essential autonomy. i'm going to bring that into meditations. thank you!
Improv wordsmithing is an art, I love raw and half baked, it has a beauty to it that cannot quite be matched by something “perfect/complete”; it’s so... meaty 😋👌🏼
danke dir! i really enjoyed writing this, and i know i will enjoy even more when i decided to return to it and flesh out some of the ideas in there. most of them surprised even me!
YES!
The fundamental nature of consciousness is experiential.
There's an interview snippet in which Jung speaks of telepathic events' demonstrating that consciousness is unbound by time and space. This puts in mind the experiential, quantum state of entangled particles - a relationship also unbound by time and space.
As awareness focuses attention on a photon, a cloud of probable states will collapse into a manifestation which may be perceived as a particle. Observation alters the experience.
...
And, just tonight, in a virtual shamanic circle, we received this wisdom:
Loving one's fellow humans - and all creation - isn't a "command", its what our hearts - our souls - are doing, all the time. Conflict may impede it, emotions may confuse it and disappointment & fear may choke it down to a trickle, but nothing can completely stop our natural, ecstatic expression of love and gratitude.
"We're all here on earth to help others. What on earth the others are here for I don't know."
- W. H. Auden
Jung's view on the deep psyche / nontemporal / nonlinear self is a trip. Man was so ahead of his time it's nuts.
Love the Auden quote. And the realization from circle. Thanks for sharing. Yes - there is a natural state, and then there's everything going on on top of it which distracts us from feeling it. Thank god for practices which drive us back down to the true state :-)
LOVE THAT: "We can self-examine, think critically, and become fully honest with ourselves and the world as a result." And I agree, if we win this out within ourselves, the world is safe.
Oh ... thank you, this is so clear, and empowering!
you're quite welcome! thank you as well. mad love.
Hello Mackenzie,
Not having had any contact with you since you were a very young girl, I am happily surprised to encounter from your hand such a brilliant piece of writing. Of course, my “surprise” is understandable, if not silly, given that you have matured and grown into a perceptive woman, with many years of learning and much experience of living since last I saw you.
This piece on mysticism is very well done, in my opinion. Very clear, very direct, very insightful. Mysticism, or gnosis, is quite simply, as you say, "direct experience of the divine," or, in my path's parlance, direct, unmediated experience of true nature, or Being.
Many of the turns of phrase in your writing are striking and quotable, again, in my opinion. (E.g., “It’s all at once personal and the least personal—that is, of the highest order—game in town. It’s both everlasting and emergent, in and of . . . “; “mysticism is a by-product of paying close, courageous, unabashed attention to life”; and “Mysticism is about cultivating a living, breathing relationship with something wholly other inside of you.”)
As a long-time practitioner of “paying close, courageous unabashed attention to life” as life manifests in the present moment, and this moment, and this moment, and so forth, I can attest to the truth of your words. The view that you speak from in this post tells me that you, too, are a practitioner and have had many and repeated direct experiences of what I will call essential presence, which is known in my path’s teaching as the true nature of the soul.
I note your interest in autonomy and am not surprised to find it here, because all deep experiences with essential presence, or the divine, will lead eventually to the question, Who am I? I appreciate what you have written here, and acknowledge that autonomy can be a thorny subject, especially here in America (which you reference) where autonomy, or independence, is valued so highly.
Given your interest in the topic, I think you might enjoy and find relevant to the inquiry on autonomy one of my teacher’s books "The Pearl Beyond Price: Integration of Personality Into Being, an Object Relations Approach," by A.H. Almaas, especially chapters 3 & 4. To whet your appetite, here is a quote from chapter 4:
“Now, we can understand in a deeper way the autonomy of Being. From the perspective of Being, what we are is not determined by either the past or the present situation. We are not a reaction; we simply are, an essential existence, totally free from the past. Our nature, our identity, cannot be influenced by situations. The main difference between Being and ego—which is that Being is just being-as-such and ego a reaction from the past—makes Being the true autonomy, and ego autonomy a delusion.”
I’m glad you have found an outlet for the creative and intelligent expression of your learning and insight. It’s fun and satisfying to meet you again in this way!
Love, Doug
Doug! What a delight to feel you here in this space. And all inspired by my words, no less! Big smiles.
Thank you for the reflection, compliments, and shared experience. I can see I come by my ideas honestly, being that you're at least some part of where I came from. It's very cool to read about your own travels & insights. Thank you, again, for sharing them.
Thanks, also, for the bit from Almaas. I've encountered his work a handful of times over the years, but haven't immersed myself in it. From that passage you quoted, I can certainly feel a resonance. The brilliance of the autonomous self is quite... powerful, no? My only issue is with pitting the ego against Being, as in my experience, we actually need to have a really stellar, healthy connection to our egos in order to explore any of these realms. The ego is not the enemy, only the defense of it at the expense of all other experience is.
Anyway, great to "see" you here & converse a bit. Thanks for your wisdom.
Love,
Mac
Hello Mackenzie,
A quick note. Almaas does not in any way, shape or form teach to work against the ego, for not only do we need a healthy ego to move beyond it, but also, the ego is part of ourselves, so to fight it is to prolong the inner fight, the inner conflict that alone separates us and our experience from Being. So whatever you heard in the quoted material that led you to conclude Almaas recommends fighting the ego isn't there. What he wants us to see is that autonomy on the ego level is not autonomy on the essential level - that they are too very different experiences.
Good to hear from you,
Doug
hey doug. you're totally write. i was reading hastily & interpreted some of his phrasing lazily. of course he's got his head on his shoulders & knows what he's talking about! ;-) important distinction, too - autonomy of ego vs. essential autonomy. i'm going to bring that into meditations. thank you!
right* :-p
Improv wordsmithing is an art, I love raw and half baked, it has a beauty to it that cannot quite be matched by something “perfect/complete”; it’s so... meaty 😋👌🏼
danke dir! i really enjoyed writing this, and i know i will enjoy even more when i decided to return to it and flesh out some of the ideas in there. most of them surprised even me!