ZERO POINT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Microcosm/MacrocosmMICROCOSM Zero Point Origins of Consciousness and Creation 
1. The Issues of Human Consciousness |
| The Within-Without from Zero Points
series is exploring the zero point origins of three main phenomenon– atoms
or quanta, the Cosmos or Universe, and human consciousness. Blavatsky
claimed in 1888 that the Gods and other invisible powers ‘clothed themselves
in bodies’ based upon such zero point centres. These are described
as ‘holes dug in Space’ wherein the influences of higher spheres
are made manifest fromw within without, as Divine Emanations and Spiritual
Intelligences inform the transformations of the matters and energies within
the material world.
The Zero Point thesis of Blavatsky is certainly confirmed by modern theories of the origin of the Universe, and by physical theories depicting the mysterious nature of matter and the laws of nature. The Universe is now believed, within science itself, as having a zero point origin, and possibly returning again to such a naught point at the end of time, appearing and disappearing from below the level of the Plankian units! So also, theories about the nature of matter trace the atoms to quanta, to superstring elements in higher sevenfold space dimensions–again, zero point sources, as described by Blavatsky. And so, Blavatsky thesis is vindicated as to the ZERO POINT ORIGINS of both MATTER and the COSMOS! |
| However, when it comes to modern consciousness studies,
the idea of the zero point origin of human consciousness is never considered
even within science considered to be 'scientific.' Instead,
the ‘scientists of new formation’ came to believe in ‘the head
doctrine’–the claim that the material brain processes in the head somehow
produce our inner ‘consciousness of being.’ Of course, no-one knows
where or how this is accomplished, or what this consciousness is, but it
is simply ‘assumed’ that this is so–that neurological activity in the brain
produces consciousness. Modern thought has also dismissed the study
of the soul and of spirit, as being simply residues of religious and superstitious
peoples, and assume that we are simply material beings who live and die
with the physical body. In the mainstream of modern psychology and
science, there is no soul, no psychic world or afterlife, or higher states
of consciousness and the like. There is also no physics or metaphysics
of consciousness!
The contemporary scientific literature demonstrates how scientists are in the dark about the mysteries of consciousness. This is exemplified by a recent Scientific American article–“The Quest to find Consciousness”–published in a special issue on MIND (2004). The most certain comments offered by author G. Roth regarding consciousness are that “a true understanding of the phenomenon remains elusive,” and further, that “For now, no definitive explanations exist ....” Similarly, science journalist John Horgan, in The Undiscovered Mind (1999), writes: “Mind-scientists and philosophers cannot even agree on what consciousness is, let alonehow it should be explained.” (p. 228) At one point, Horgan quotes Harvard psychologist, Howard Gardner, who suggests that someone may find “deep and fruitful commonalities between Western views of the mind and those incorporated into the philosophy and religion of the Far East.” Gardner suggests that a fundamentally new insight is necessary, although unfortunately, “we can’t anticipate the extraordinary mind because it comes from a funny place that puts things together in a funny kind of way.” (p. 260) These comments are somewhat ironic, as indeed, there is a fundamental difference between western views of the mind and the Eastern spiritual traditions with their emphasis upon the heart. Understanding this difference between the head doctrine and the heart doctrine will certainly provide a novel perspective on the issues of consciousness–and put things together in a “funny kind of way.” |
What are the nature and origins of human consciousness?
These are big league issues of profound importance not only to science
but to us individually–in terms of understanding the meaning and significance
of human life. Unfortunately, according to the framework to be offered
here, the whole basis of the modern approach to consciousness is fundamentally
flawed and misguided. The mysteries of consciousness are far deeper
than imagined by author Roth–who ends up associating the “seat of consciousness”
with the association areas of the cerebral hemispheres in interaction
with other brain structures. Further, the scientists have no idea
of the profound alternative mystical and spiritual viewpoints on these
issues of consciousness. This illustration is from Goth's article,
and is a perfect image to depict the head doctrine. 
While most people would consider that understanding human consciousness is somewhat irrelevant to their life, apart from posing issues in science, this is simply not the case. In fact, if the strictly material conceptualization of consciousness is true, then this has profound implications for the nature and significance of human existence. Isaac Asimov identifies the most important of these implications:
|
| In the last decade, Scientific American
published several influential articles on the study of consciousness–a
first for this prestigious magazine; including one by David Chalmers–addressing
The Puzzle of Conscious Experience. (Dec.,1995) He describes
consciousness as being paradoxically, “the most familiar thing in the
world and the most mysterious,” and he notes the “tangle of diverse
and conflicting theories” existing within the field. According
to Chalmers, the
“easy problems of consciousness” concern the mechanisms
of various forms of cognition, while the “hard problems” concern
“how the physical processes in the brain give rise to subjective experience.”
The basic fact of the subjective side of consciousness simply cannot be
deduced from physical facts about the brain’s functioning. He notes that
we have no idea how the subjective experiences arise from neurological
processes. Between the physiological processes and the subjective
experience, there is, in scientific terms, an explanatory gap.
Chalmers’ solution is to suggest that consciousness is perhaps a “fundamental feature of the world,” irreducible to anything else. He compares this to basic physical concepts such as space-time, mass, charge and so on, which are regarded as fundamental properties, unexplained in terms of lower order phenomena. Chalmers notes that physicist, John Wheeler, suggests that “information” is fundamental to the physics of the universe, and that consciousness might be the “subjective side” of information. In this case, information would have a two fold nature as both physical and experiential, objective and subjective. Thus, a model of consciousness would require a set of fundamental laws unique to the description of consciousness, analogous to the laws of physics used to describe the physical world. This is a new form of dualism–not of mind and matter–but of the subjective and objective sides of information. It also brings us back to the possibility of a substantive consciousness, which is something, whatever that might be. The problem of consciousness has given rise to a diversity of ideas and theories, and yet remains the most paradoxical, unexplained mystery within science today. Generally, theorists talk over consciousness, around it, under it, about it, but have few substantive ideas which do more than scratch the surface of this profound mystery. In this critical area, science is almost purely speculative. However, almost all of the recent theoretical perspectives subscribe to the common assumption that the brain produces consciousness and the mind–although the details of this magical transformation are lacking. When we look more closely at scientific explanations of what consciousness is, and how and where it is produced by the brain, they are based on nothing more than speculation and hunches–a house of cards, as Crick admits. If there is an immaterial mind, spirit and soul, and some form of irreducible consciousness, what are these things, and how do they relate to the physically body and brain? There are many issues to be resolved and all the doors should be kept open in trying to understand these mysteries. The idea that a human being has a spirit or soul, or a divine spark, has not yet been dis-proven, because the nature and origin of human consciousness pose such profound mysteries. Scientists only assume that it is produced by the neurology of brain processes, as they gloss over the gaps in science. Most of the science writers explaining physics and creation processes do not explore consciousness, except in a cursory way. For the most part, it is simply assumed that the brain produces consciousness, which arises at a certain level of biological complexity of brain functioning. Physicists don’t generally consider that human beings could be ‘conscious’ of their own favorite vacuum states, voids or plenums, hyperspace or inner singularities, or be subject to non-local effects. The models of physics are not considered in relation to consciousness studies, and so consciousness is generally left out of the equations. Psychologists don’t study physics, nor physicists, consciousness, and neither are conversant with mystical teachings on their own favorite subjects. Scientists imagine that they discovered the quantum vacuum! And Singularities! |
| To begin, the term consciousness can
be taken generally to refer to the inner awareness of being, which each
of us has or is within our lives. Although we might see another persons’
physical being, we cannot examine their inner world of consciousness or
their experience of being. Yet, in a very real sense, it is within
this inner world that each of us has our existence, and in order to understand
the issues of consciousness, we must make an effort to understand it within
ourselves–through direct inner awareness and experience. This approach
is necessary to supplement other scientific approaches, and it is the method
of the mystics, yogis and masters of the esoteric traditions who study
consciousness within themselves, and make conscious efforts to attain more
of it, and to be enlightened as to the nature of Self.
Book I of this series, entitled THE HEART DOCTRINE:
Mystical views of the Origin and Nature of Human Consciousness, addresses
these issues in considerable depth. The main thesis is that consciousness
is not produced by the brain within the head, but that it arises from within
the subtle dimensions of the human heart. “I” in mystical and spiritual
teachings is associated with a point source of supernal light established
within the higher Space dimensions of the heart. This principle infuses
life and consciousness into physical body through the initiating of the
heart beat, the circulation of the blood and the oxygenation of the body,
as part of the ‘ensouling’ of the living being. Consciousness enters
the heart in a newly conceived being, and will withdraw back into the Heart
at moments of death–back to what the Dalai Lama calls the ‘indestructible
drop’ within the Heart. The indestructible drop is also called the
bliss sheath within the heart. It is at the center of three
major channels which circulate light through seven chakras, or wheels of
energy, within the subtle anatomy. Again, the circulation of
light can be conceived of as embodied in the number sequence of 1-3-7.
Mystical teachings identify the ‘Self’ attained in ‘self-realization’ as
involving the awakening of the Heart, and this is the basis for states
of samadhi. The Self is within the heart, and this is what the head
scientists fail to consider.
|
In The Heart’s Code, psychologist Paul
Pearsall (1998) maintains that, energetically speaking, the heart–rather
than the brain–is clearly the centre of the psychological universe.
Indeed:
The idea, that the heart is the centre of the psychology of the individual, instead of the brain, would indeed revolutionize our understanding of normal and supernormal psychology. Adopting this view would be analogous to the Copernican revolution, wherein scientists realized that the Earth, rather than being the centre of the universe, travelled around the sun within the solar system. The egocentric attitude of humans was shattered. Likewise, the acceptance of a deeper conceptualization of the heart, consciousness and the nature of Self would constitute a revolutionary development in modern psychology, philosophy and the life sciences. Pearsall states that we have been too “brain focussed” in the search for mind, and that instead of thinking in terms of a dual mind and body, a more rewarding and appropriate approach would be to adopt a triune model: that is, of a thinking brain, the material body and the energetic and emotional heart. The heart is the primary energy centre within the individual, and in Pearsall’s terms “conveys the code that represents the soul.” Mystical and spiritual psychologies abound describe human beings as having such a triune nature--with head, heart and hands. Whereas modern psychology examines only the mind and the body in a dualistic paradigm, mystical psychology connects third force, the emotional and soul nature to the Heart. Further, consciousness is not simply produced by the brain, but it has connection to the Heart and Soul! Pearsall examines the nature of cellular memory, life fields and non-local information fields in attempts to account for the various clinical and psychological evidences that are emerging about the mysterious qualities and role of the human heart. The heart’s attributes and functions are much more mysterious and significant than conventional scientific thinking supposes. Therefore, Pearsall argues that, through the psychology of the heart, modern psychology is “beginning to make its first tentative contacts with the soul.” (p. 6) The isomorphism between a Microcosm and the Macrocosm involves the whole being, and not simply brain processes in the head. The Heart is the electromagnetic centre of the living being, and consciousness may well originate from sub-atomic realms of light through inner dynamics. The supernal nature of consciousness as light is a dominant theme in mystical writings, and the self-illuminating element described within the Cave of Brahman is truly the Sun of the body, and not the Mind. Mystics compare the Mind to the moon, which only reflects the light of Self, or the Sun within the Heart. back to table of contents for Microcosm/Macrocosm
|
