• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

Universal Awareness

Migrated topic.
dream_denizen

dream_denizen

Rising Star
Is the universe becoming self-aware in the human nervous system?

I believe this to be true. Awareness must embody some sort of fractal behavior. The universe refines itself infinitely; and we as humans may be on the brink of the biggest change of universal-awareness in eternity.
 
dream_denizen said:
Is the universe becoming self-aware in the human nervous system?

I believe this to be true. Awareness must embody some sort of fractal behavior. The universe refines itself infinitely; and we as humans may be on the brink of the biggest change of universal-awareness in eternity.
Click to expand...

I also believe this, but i extend it to creation waking up to the awareness that it is god. Human awareness may be preceeded by greater and greater levels of awareness further down the evolutionary tree.
 
Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Yes, if we are considered aware, it naturally follows that the universe has become aware (excluding the possibility of prior awareness) as we are subsets of it.

"Awareness must embody some sort of fractal behavior"

If awareness is defined in relation to its manifestation in humans, this must be true as well since neural structures are considered fractals.
 
dream_denizen said:
Is the universe becoming self-aware in the human nervous system?
Click to expand...

This is an interesting angle of inquiry, friend. I don't feel that labeling it a tautology is accurate. What is so rhetorical about questioning our interrelationship with the cosmos? Is it not fascinating to contemplate the interphase between our own individual minds (through our own biochemistry) and the eclipsing of the relative thought patterning and universal levels of awareness?

I am personally, most intrigued by the synthesis of ego-self and Universal Self, within the totality of the Grid all conscious being. If this question has been raised repeatedly... GREAT!!! It's good for our intellects to study this paradoxical situation. I am not tired of thinking about the symbiosis of the individual and the universal. Of all the redundancies in human thought... this one is a fantastic idea to reiterate. Please address this issue in more detail, dream_denizen

I have always felt that we humans are becoming aware of the universal, as a cohesive whole, through our efforts to understand ourselves in relation to everything else. A game of hide and seek, for sure. You know, searching for the unity and the harmony of the existential paradigm we all find ourselves living within. :idea:

If you are saying that the universe itself, call it God or random chaos (or any number of descriptors), needs the human mind to facilitate it's own awareness... I don't fully agree. Neither do I fully disagree. I will contemplate upon this idea, that's for sure! This is a most worthy subject of discussion and I see your point of view.

Although, it has been suggested by many souls in the last few thousand years, that the Divine chose to create the physical universe, as well as all of the non physical universes, so as to perceive of itself, THROUGH the manifestation of diversity. I've often questioned how diversification can lead the Insubstantial, causative essence to know itself. Personally, I feel this is another variant of propensity towards the anthropomorphizing the Spirit.

Still, when we merge within the Grid of the universal mind or "Cosmic Consciousness", we do remember being this Indivisible quintessence all along. This remembrance is the cause of great bliss. Could this be the specific reason for organic evolution? Does the imply that one of the aspects of the Divine is curiosity about itself? Or is it we who are curious about God?


Does our neurology play a pivotal role in the Awakening of the Omniself? If so, why would it need to find itself conscious within the the human condition? So, in this light, you raise a valid point of consideration. We might all meditate upon it's significance and compare notes?
 
so as to perceive of itself, THROUGH the manifestation of diversity. I've often questioned how diversification can lead the Insubstantial, causative essence to know itself.
Click to expand...

Just wanted to chime in on this quick. Maybe it will help. I have been guided to believe that the great diversity in which the master dreamer sees its dream is because eternity can get very boring, and it is this always changing, evolving universe that keeps our great master dreamer entertained.

So that the diversity serves to entertain and allows for a variety of experiences/dreams for the dreamer. So he can view his dream from all possible viewpoints/situations/perspectives/etc.
 
unclesyd said:
so as to perceive of itself, THROUGH the manifestation of diversity. I've often questioned how diversification can lead the Insubstantial, causative essence to know itself.
Click to expand...

Just wanted to chime in on this quick. Maybe it will help. I have been guided to believe that the great diversity in which the master dreamer sees its dream is because eternity can get very boring, and it is this always changing, evolving universe that keeps our great master dreamer entertained.

So that the diversity serves to entertain and allows for a variety of experiences/dreams for the dreamer. So he can view his dream from all possible viewpoints/situations/perspectives/etc.
Click to expand...


I respect your teaching. I have come to personally feel that this is another mask of anthropomorphic deification, but if I suspend this concept... I can see through your eyes. Yes, it sometimes does indeed look as if the Insubstantial Quintessence plays a game of hide and seek, for no other reason than because it CAN and appears to desire to do just so.

Well, perhaps desire is an inappropriate word for this causative force? One based on a human reference point? After all, beyond our small ability to comprehend the Totality of Being, given our subjective perception of reality, how are we to proclaim any intention for the Divine?

It simply Is. 8)

You share a similarity of belief with the brilliant, mid-twentieth century Indian Sage, Sri Aurobindo. His seminal literary work, The Life Divine is a must read for any inquisitive non-dualist's in the fold (book I is entitled, The Omnipresent Reality and The Universe). Now what was his famous quote about the Spirit and it's intent?

Sri Aurobindo said:
What you ask, was the beginning of it all? And it is this... Existence that multiplied Itself for the sheer delight of Being.
And plunged into numberless trillions of forms, so that it might find Itself, innumerably.
Click to expand...
 
Rising Spirit said:
I don't feel that labeling it a tautology is accurate.
Click to expand...

I disagree. "Tautology" is extremely accurate, not that this is a bad thing. Redundancy is often necessary to lay a foundation for logical continuation. Tautology is crucial to mathematics, for instance. By establishing simple definitions we can formulate more complex abstractions. "The universe [is] becoming self-aware in the human nervous system." By this statement alone we can start drawing very profound conclusions. What is necessary is to establish more tautologies and relate them systematically. With a method like this we can formulate sound conclusions that avoid notions of relativism.
 
Life and death come from the ever living.

The 3D universe is always in a state of becoming.

The 3+1D universe was becoming, is becoming and has become.

There's a lot of confusion about "living in the now", hopefully that helps.
 
i agree that awe may be a fundamental aspect of all


as for evolution... this term does not imply an agenda, it does not mean to improve and it does not mean that what has evolved is any more or less important than what has not.

humans always place themselves at the center of the universe

i think a lot of people are teleologists here
believing in a final cause
 
We are microcosms of the macrocosmic universe.
We were created in the image of God, in the image of the whole universe.
I believe in the holographic fractal idea. There are universes within universes.
 
..quantum physics believes there must be two basic things in the universe..an 'observer' consciousness, and whatever is 'out there' that is being observed..an observation causes the thing to become 'real', based on probability..

..if the 'other' is a mysterious 'Mirror with No Frame', then ultimately all manifests out of the consciousness..

..as consciousness may be a 'Field' or infinite continuum, it is therefore universal in the absolute sense..

(there's another concept i call 'awareness' which is external to time, but that's getting a bit esoteric for now)

also it has been pointed out that the whole cosmos resembles an analogue of a living organism..fields of energy to 'neurotransmit' between stellar objects, and black hole 'orifaces' to dispose of some matter or replenish the system with rich organic materials like iron..

as above, so below (the bigger is in the smaller, as the smaller is in the bigger) .. Heraclitus 'the obscure' c.600BC...
 
nen888 said:
..quantum physics believes there must be two basic things in the universe..an 'observer' consciousness, and whatever is 'out there' that is being observed..an observation causes the thing to become 'real', based on probability.....
Click to expand...
I'd like to learn about this, where can I find more information about this in quantum theory?
 
nen888 said:
..quantum physics believes there must be two basic things in the universe..an 'observer' consciousness, and whatever is 'out there' that is being observed..an observation causes the thing to become 'real', based on probability..
Click to expand...

This is a common quantum myth. There is nothing in quantum mechanics that needs any reference to conscious observers. An observer in quantum mechanical terms doesn't need to refere to a conscious observer, but can refer to a measurement, that again usually refers to a trivial physical occurance. An electron can cause the collapse of the wave function. There is just a very very small part of the interpretations of quantum mechanics that postulates your idea, but it is not needed at all, and all other interpretations does not involve conscious observers. Of course, it might be possible, but there is no good reason to believe so on the basis of quantum mechanics. Besides, there is the problem of explaining the universe before consciousness came about. "Occam'z razor" comes in here.
 
Citta said:
nen888 said:
..quantum physics believes there must be two basic things in the universe..an 'observer' consciousness, and whatever is 'out there' that is being observed..an observation causes the thing to become 'real', based on probability..
Click to expand...

This is a common quantum myth. There is nothing in quantum mechanics that needs any reference to conscious observers. An observer in quantum mechanical terms doesn't need to refere to a conscious observer, but can refer to a measurement, that again usually refers to a trivial physical occurance. An electron can cause the collapse of the wave function. There is just a very very small part of the interpretations of quantum mechanics that postulates your idea, but it is not needed at all, and all other interpretations does not involve conscious observers. Of course, it might be possible, but there is no good reason to believe so on the basis of quantum mechanics. Besides, there is the problem of explaining the universe before consciousness came about. "Occam'z razor" comes in here.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... are we talking about an unconscious observer here?
 
Back
Top Bottom