4/12/2019 about 6:30 – 7:25 am
To continue with earlier posts, my question remained, how does this reality get formed? This moment? This particularly set of matter (material world) and thoughts ( consciousness).
It links back earlier write-ups, of the metaphor of churning producing matter and consiousness, and the Buddhist idea of emptiness.
And then I wrote down my thoughts, while semi awake, which I now transcribe:
How does churning bring out this reality. Because it can and does, all this [produces this reality]. So how is it this one?
I had an image before, when I talked to my wife about grief, and helping go reshape [underlined] it into a more positive direction.
I talked to her about the Buddhist concept of emptiness, sunjata. And how it really means an empty space, but filled with all possibilities.
I told her, to then put a see seed into it. From which life can grow. Just like a seed is put into a real womb, and physical life ensues (the seed being the combined female ovum and male semen, both male and female energies combined). But it seeds the empty, fertile space, of the womb to grow.
Here, I mean the spiritual growth, from idea into reality of putting a seeds into the fertile emptiness.
And seed, or kernel, is also the literal meaning behind “churning,” the other concept that was given to me. So the churning itself makes the non-describable tangible [like butter is churned out of milk]. It brings out reality.
Now, you can interpret seed here two ways: the churning produces the seed, something more tangible. I keep thinking of how while churning, milk becomes flakier at first. Or cottage cheese is more granular.
But you can also think about how the seed (noun) seeds (verb) the process of churning.
It gives it a direction, a focus (here is that word [see Inner voices: Bohm]) of what it can grow into.
And there is another part of churning. Milk becomes agitated [underlined; meaning, it HAS TO BE agitated to become tangible].
That word, too, is so multi-faceted.
At once, it means an interplay of opposites. But here is also the idea of disturbance, of disturbing something whole and peaceful and agitating it.
And the image that keeps coming to my mind is that of a pearl forming in an oyster. [ I had it a few days ago, but this morning I picked it up in semi-sleep. This is how this write-up unfolded ].
The way pearls form is that a grain of sand finds its way into the innards of the oyster, which is a living organism, and the innards are some sort of, I don’t know how to say it, slimy substance.
And the grain agitates the wholeness.
And over a long time, the oyster now builds up layers and layers around the grain, as a process of overcoming the agitation it feels inside of it.
And so, over the course of, I don’t know, years, the pearl is built up.
So that is the idea: that agitation in a fertile womb (emptiness) can grow. It needs a seed.
So in this process of how matter forms, Bohm [ or my inner "Bohmian voice", see article ] said we have three parts:
- The cosmic soup ( Emptiness, sunjata, the Hindu great ocean of Millk, the net of indra… these are all metaphors for the same concept )
- The process of churning: enfolding / unfolding
- But also a focus.
The last part is crucial, to bring out this [underlined] reality.
That is the kernel part of churning [the meaning behind the world]. To seed it, and let the process bring out the reality intended.
Now, in the ongoing process of life, it means to re-enfold/unfold current reality, with all the possibilities of this moment.
Thus consciousness chooses ( it is also enfolded).
That choice is the seed that agitates.
And lets the process of churning then unfold again, from choice outwards into physical matter AND our momentary consciousness ( 3D consciousness).
Yet remember, it is not just this reality that unfolds. It is only that this is the only one we perceive.
And there is a reason for this.
Just as in the story of the Hindus when they brought out the nectar of eternal life, or Lakshmi (goddess of early wealth), out of the comic ocean of Milk, though the churning by the opposites [Devas and Asuras], through agitation of the cosmic ocean of Milk. [earlier article still to be published].
For here is the thing: they could not bring out ONLY the good – the nectar, the goddess of wealth. But at the same time, the churning also brought out the opposite: the bad. In the story, it was both the Goddess of strife ( wherever there is the Goddess of wealth, strife follows) and Disease and pestilence and death (the opposite of eternal life). [It was all right there in there in that 2000 year old analogy]
You cannot take a whole, that is undivided, that contains all, and only bring out one part.
If “we” churn it, it will unfold itself into ALL parts and make them manifest.
Only we don’t notice.
So when a choice is made and thus agitates the great whole, and reality is churned, then all of the “anti-choices,” the ones we in 3D think we did not choose, HAVE to be manifested as well.
They have to. Only thus a whole can manifest itself.
And I don’ t just mean a second “choice” or option . As written before, choices are not binary. Not just left and right. But also an infinite spectrum, infinite nuance-choices between left and right. And infinite weightings of those choices. How strongly a path is taken. [another article to write]
So when choosing, thereby agitation, thereby churning, thereby manifestation, at that point “of the present,” all possible outcomes manifest.
Probable words, probably selves, probable lives [Seth’s terminology], alternate realities, and so on. Not just one probable worlds, but all of them. [INFINITE realities and words come into being]
It has to, so that the inner whole can stay whole while manifested [can’t read my word here]. But we just perceive this one reality.
Because, remember [earlier article], the “soup” contains both consciousness – all consciousness-- and matter, all matter, enfolded together.
So when it then unfolds, into the moment of the present, it unfolds both momentary matter AND consciousness: this world, this consciousness, of us, me, you, in this moment. [the one we perceive as real].
And this [sub] part of all-consciousness CAN only perceive this part of all-matter.
This world comes into existence FOR us, with us [underlined], together.
And so do all other versions of us.
It has to, in order to still remain whole.
So Everett/DeWitt were right, too, with their many world theory [ quantum mechanics].
And Bohm was right with the implicate order. But his assumption was that here is only ONE reality. There are infinite ones. And Everett did not see the enfolding/unfolding aspect. [Added later: Bohm did try to reconcile it a bit in his book 'An undivided universe"]
In the combination of the two theories of quantum physics, we get a complete ontology [philosophy: the study of being], of both matter AND consciousness combined.
So Mr. Einstein, you were right when you felt it: God does indeed not play dice. Nor does he bring only this reality into being.
God hedges his bets, so to speak, he brings all realities into being.
Because that is what he is: ALL-THAT-IS.
Can you see the beauty behind it all?
Namaste — I bow to you and the Divine in you.
Copyright © Hanns-Oskar Porr