Sometime during July or August 2015, I had an intense philosophical realization (or spiritual revelation) that will probably forever follow my thoughts. It was almost visionary in its intensity, and hopefully I’ll be able to accurately portray it. I am no physicist nor mathmagician, neither am I a ‘New Ager’ (anymore).
It began by asking the question, “If a person does wrong, is something faulty with their ‘machinery’ or their ‘software’?” A persons ‘machinery’ being their physical, biological, chemical processes; the DNA that creates these processes, the actual ‘stuff’ they’re made out of. A persons ‘software’ is their psychological makeup, their personality, or their thought processes. I understand this is a dualistic view of what constitutes a person – in reality the two effect each other greatly – but the question I was asking was whether or not a person has complete control over their actions or thoughts.
My friend and I started out talking about the ‘Big Bang’ – what we observed in our minds eye to be the primal oneness that the multitudinous universe sprung out of. We asked, if we were to entirely destroy this universe and restart it, would it be the same universe playing itself out again? (I need to learn more about quantum mechanics, because that would go into randomness.)
We posited to ourselves, ‘What if everything consisted of one being split into two?’ – like the branches of some great tree. Everything being a binary of decisions in a matrix of binary decisions, 1’s and 0’s being spread out throughout the cosmos.
Light and dark, up and down, left and right – everything consisting of dualities, and every single atom being the end result of a continuous chain of dualities – 1’s and 0’s.
We then asked ourselves ‘What is Time?’ Ultimately, its a measurement of change. A timeless universe would be a universe in stasis. One lacking in this division of dualities, going from one to two, with each splitting off from the other. We believe a timeless universe would be one that existed before the ‘Big Bang’.
What then is change without something perceiving that change? It is changeless. Timeless.
So I posit my theory that consciousness ultimately is change, ultimately is time – and thus is everything – just in different levels.
My theory is that a dot is conscious of itself, and what a dot consists of. A line is conscious of itself, and the dots that make it up. A sphere is conscious of the lines that make up that sphere, and the dots below it. However, this ‘consciousness’ does not consist of words – it may not even consist of feelings. It might consist of mere math.
As that sphere becomes more complex, it divides itself off. It becomes more varied chemicals/elements/etc, further increasing in complexity where the conditions are right. It changes. Then it eventually becomes ‘life’ – what we consider biological – which may have ‘feelings’ – since there’s an increasing number of sensory organs.
Then with increasing complexity of interacting changes (minor consciousnesses) the biological consciousnesses further increases its sentience. I would argue that sentience is changes perceiving changes that are perceiving changes, down increasingly to the level of specks of existence.
Now, if our level of consciousness is time – ‘the fourth dimension’ – who is to say that dimensions above us are consciousnesses (changes) that perceive the change of our own consciousnesses?
This is where I argue that the supreme consciousness is a One that can perceive the change of change.
In my next post I will describe what comes out of this.