When people talk about PSI or spirit or higher consciousness, there is always a question present: is it all empty ego-serving words(aka BS), or can we really connect to some kind of actual spiritual reality, a reality so powerful that it even affects what lives on after our mundane body dies?
In a way, this is a follow-on to my two previous posts on this topic, as I work my way down from general theory to something more concrete:
Higher Consciousness I:
http://drpauljohn.blogspot.
Higher Consciousness II:
http://drpauljohn.blogspot.
Previously, Yeshua and I proposed the use of a special tree as a kind of image to use in representing the noosphere (or cosmos?) which we are part of, to use in connecting us in reality, in our whole brain and soul, to that greater life. Ia gain thank Jelel for pointing me to Jung’s Red Book, https://www.amazon.com/Red-
But why do we need an image of the noosphere?
>
>
>
> Well, why do we need an image of the earth as something other than the flat plate most people still imagine it to be in their personal, subjective life? The flat plate way of thinking can be safe enough, so long as we do not plan to leave a small village or understand other people who do. But to plan our travels beyond that village, we need a more complete picture. Even for survival on this little planet, we desperately need a more accurate picture of who we are. We need better situational awareness.
>
> Images of the noosphere can help us connect, and see further, and even find our way to survival. And yes, we can use them as a kind of mandala, the kind of 2D or 3D image which we can project into, as guides for projecting our minds further and deeper.
A serious practical person recently asked: “So who cares about the details of the noosphere? Yes, we are on a living planet. We have known about the noosphere since Teilhard de Chardin and Verdansky, long ago. So we already know that climate is important, but we already planted our gardens, and it is time to move on. What is new here?”
In the first place, planting our gardens does NOT save us from really major, real threats of climate change, but neither Teilhard nor Verdansky gave us the level of situational awareness we really need here for the spiritual side of this, which will decide whether we integrate it all enough to stay alive in the end anyway.
They pictured our noosphere as just this earth, as a system which has emerged just from the natural thermodynamic forces on this earth. Most really serious scientists cannot believe that picture, because they know that evolution does not work that way, regardless of whether we assume baby physics like today’s Standard Model or more interesting or esoteric alternatives. In all cases, we know that earth alone is not enough to justify the kinds of emergent intelligence people have discussed for millennia.
And so, naturally, I am glad that the deep gaps in the theoriesof de Chardin and Verdansky can be corrected, as in the papers I published last year (linked to at werboc.com/religions.htm). The key idea is that our local noosphere, what we are part of, must at a minimum be viewed as a member of an entire species of noospheres, and that it makes more sense to think of our noosphere as embracing our entire solar system, not just one planet. After all, there is much more energy and movement in our sun than on the earth. For ordinary complex carbon molecules, the earth is the center of our solar system, but noospheres clearly rely more on other forces and energy (“dark matter and energy”). Astronomy has shown us that dark matter and energy connect most with suns and galaxies.
>
>
>
> AND SO: we get tpo the first image of the noosphere, which Yeshua and I still emphasize: the great tree, a tree of life stretching from the mud (like the archaea deep in the earth, or like the underworld in the Disney cartoon Coco) all the way up to the sun itself, to upper reaches from which one can see further. As we connect to each other, to nature, and to the whole system, we can connect more effectively if we see what we are doing, and see how WE can connect down to the mud or up to the highest level of intelligence in our noosphere, like the sun above.
>
>
>
> Of course, it is not really a tree. Above all, we are experiencing it from the inside, almost never able to look at it from afar. Since the real source of energy here is from above, our connection upwards has some special importance, especially as we start to channel the whole system, as we become avatars of the noosphere by exercising what I now call “partial gating.”
Higher Consciousness I:
http://drpauljohn.blogspot.
Higher Consciousness II:
http://drpauljohn.blogspot.
Previously, Yeshua and I proposed the use of a special tree as a kind of image to use in representing the noosphere (or cosmos?) which we are part of, to use in connecting us in reality, in our whole brain and soul, to that greater life. Ia gain thank Jelel for pointing me to Jung’s Red Book, https://www.amazon.com/Red-
But why do we need an image of the noosphere?
>
>
>
> Well, why do we need an image of the earth as something other than the flat plate most people still imagine it to be in their personal, subjective life? The flat plate way of thinking can be safe enough, so long as we do not plan to leave a small village or understand other people who do. But to plan our travels beyond that village, we need a more complete picture. Even for survival on this little planet, we desperately need a more accurate picture of who we are. We need better situational awareness.
>
> Images of the noosphere can help us connect, and see further, and even find our way to survival. And yes, we can use them as a kind of mandala, the kind of 2D or 3D image which we can project into, as guides for projecting our minds further and deeper.
A serious practical person recently asked: “So who cares about the details of the noosphere? Yes, we are on a living planet. We have known about the noosphere since Teilhard de Chardin and Verdansky, long ago. So we already know that climate is important, but we already planted our gardens, and it is time to move on. What is new here?”
In the first place, planting our gardens does NOT save us from really major, real threats of climate change, but neither Teilhard nor Verdansky gave us the level of situational awareness we really need here for the spiritual side of this, which will decide whether we integrate it all enough to stay alive in the end anyway.
They pictured our noosphere as just this earth, as a system which has emerged just from the natural thermodynamic forces on this earth. Most really serious scientists cannot believe that picture, because they know that evolution does not work that way, regardless of whether we assume baby physics like today’s Standard Model or more interesting or esoteric alternatives. In all cases, we know that earth alone is not enough to justify the kinds of emergent intelligence people have discussed for millennia.
And so, naturally, I am glad that the deep gaps in the theoriesof de Chardin and Verdansky can be corrected, as in the papers I published last year (linked to at werboc.com/religions.htm). The key idea is that our local noosphere, what we are part of, must at a minimum be viewed as a member of an entire species of noospheres, and that it makes more sense to think of our noosphere as embracing our entire solar system, not just one planet. After all, there is much more energy and movement in our sun than on the earth. For ordinary complex carbon molecules, the earth is the center of our solar system, but noospheres clearly rely more on other forces and energy (“dark matter and energy”). Astronomy has shown us that dark matter and energy connect most with suns and galaxies.
>
>
>
> AND SO: we get tpo the first image of the noosphere, which Yeshua and I still emphasize: the great tree, a tree of life stretching from the mud (like the archaea deep in the earth, or like the underworld in the Disney cartoon Coco) all the way up to the sun itself, to upper reaches from which one can see further. As we connect to each other, to nature, and to the whole system, we can connect more effectively if we see what we are doing, and see how WE can connect down to the mud or up to the highest level of intelligence in our noosphere, like the sun above.
>
>
>
> Of course, it is not really a tree. Above all, we are experiencing it from the inside, almost never able to look at it from afar. Since the real source of energy here is from above, our connection upwards has some special importance, especially as we start to channel the whole system, as we become avatars of the noosphere by exercising what I now call “partial gating.”
And so I come to ANOTHER image of the noosphere, the image of the sun included in:
I found this video very useful, but only just once so far. For the first time since 1980 or so, I tried very heavy meditation and attunement as I was going to be. My wife moved a flat panel TV from our study to the wall of the bedroom, with a link to Google Chromecast such that I could see this video and do basic controls even as I was lying in bed in a darkened room, late in the day. This entire video is a kind of complex moving mandala of music and images, more complex than I am ready to repeat. But the image of the sun, connected there to the rest, and showing the glowing edge at a time of partial eclipse, has stayed with me, and helped add strength to the many connections with the noosphere which I have been trying to juggle lately.
As an example, I think of that image now when I think of the long-standing but growing problem of “How do we live in the middle, between Scylla and Charybdis”? Even in my old mundane job at NSF, I was struck by the twin hazards of delusions of helplessness versus delusions of grandeur, weakening so many people doing ordinary scientific research. I respcted Barbara Marx Hubbard when she (a follower of de Chardin) said: “We need to see ourselves as COCREATORS.
As part of the noosphere, we are absolutely not helpless, or just mundane, but we are none of us the true one god of our planet either. We need to be clear on who we really are.” That part still makes sense to me. The FURTHER one gets both in science and in spiritual connection (which need to be connected to be whole), the more important this duality becomes.
As an example, I think of that image now when I think of the long-standing but growing problem of “How do we live in the middle, between Scylla and Charybdis”? Even in my old mundane job at NSF, I was struck by the twin hazards of delusions of helplessness versus delusions of grandeur, weakening so many people doing ordinary scientific research. I respcted Barbara Marx Hubbard when she (a follower of de Chardin) said: “We need to see ourselves as COCREATORS.
As part of the noosphere, we are absolutely not helpless, or just mundane, but we are none of us the true one god of our planet either. We need to be clear on who we really are.” That part still makes sense to me. The FURTHER one gets both in science and in spiritual connection (which need to be connected to be whole), the more important this duality becomes.
There are times in the early morning, when I can do partial gating to that whole, and sense what Jung called “the spirit of the deep,” which actually can see beyond this solar system. But more often, in active life, I find it helpful to be mindful of that specific kind of sun, what that sun represents, to establish a proper relation.
I also think of the Book of Exodus. More precisely, I think of the passage in the New English Bible where Moses talks to the burning bush. I never really read that passage until my wife Luda and I took a HAL cruise from Argentina to Florida, by way of Brazil and Caribbean, and went to a seminar by a reform rabbi deeply interested in that passage.
Did Moses really exist, and was this really a record of what he experienced on that mountain? Basically, I do think so, just as I think Jesus actually existed, with very high probability. And yes, someone talked to him through that glowing bush. (Hell, I even had an experience in the 1970’s when a well-known psychic announced SHE had been visited by God, the day after I experimented with visiting and talking to her. She guessed wrong about who I was, but she got the message right.)
>
>
So WHO talked to Moses there? “I am who I am.” Hell, even I could have used that line in total honesty. (So did Popeye the sailor man, who reminds me of my father’s father.) But then Moses asked something like: “Why don’t you show me your true face? You are not just a bush, after all.” The ANSWER WAS LIKE: “Pardon me, I could, but I don’t want to burn your eyes out.” So, yes, that reminds me of that noosphere sun image.
>
>
>
> And note: that was NOT what our culture now calls “Jehovah,” an archetype well known to folks like Jung. Today’s “Jehovah” is one of many typical thought-form archetypes, as real as Santa Claus, a kind of REFLECTION of the real thing. A reflection in a funhouse mirror of the mind, not at all accurate. I tend to believe that this part of the Bible is itself an imperfect reflection, but far more accurate than later Christian stories about Moses’ conversation.
>
>
>
> And note: that was NOT what our culture now calls “Jehovah,” an archetype well known to folks like Jung. Today’s “Jehovah” is one of many typical thought-form archetypes, as real as Santa Claus, a kind of REFLECTION of the real thing. A reflection in a funhouse mirror of the mind, not at all accurate. I tend to believe that this part of the Bible is itself an imperfect reflection, but far more accurate than later Christian stories about Moses’ conversation.
No comments:
Post a Comment