3.4 THE TWO DIRECTIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE (PART IV)
COMPLEXITY: AWARE OF SELF C SIMPLICITY:
AWARE OF THE WORLD
3.4.1 Integration, Synthesis
The many dichotomies in the literature and in my
experience had long puzzled me. Some of these opposed dyads correspond to the
difficulty of dealing with paradoxes (causing the 'brain-fry' symptom). For
example:
- Intellectual Or experiential: Braud's plea to not
abandon intellectual theorising while reintegrating the imaginal and the
experiential (1998) is a plea for synthesis,
- Left-minded repetitive learning or 'unconscious
learning' or 'whole brain learning' (a form of use of intuitive and 'global' or
holistic knowing),
- 'Give up intellect!' or 'let go of ego' injunctions Or
developing into a Higher Self through personality synthesis or 'whole brain
functioning', 'brain synchrony' or 'multi-tracking' (Houston, 1982)
- William James (1902) has formulated brilliantly
another of these dyads, with his description of the 'once born' or 'twice born'
religions, the first corresponding to more ancient forms, and the latter to
more modern forms of religion.
These led me to defining the notion of 'New Paradigm'
as being a composite of a first movement toward the complex, and then a second
'shift', an integrative one, that brings on a sophisticated, composite picture.
But some other dichotomies cannot be accounted for by this shift. For
example:
- Return-remembrance Or 'higher'-transcendence (roughly
Wilber's 'pre-trans fallacy'),
-Daily
mindfulness-compassion/one-of-enlightenment-experience(s), as presented by
Kornfield (1993, pp.120-134), (two types of spiritual schools)
- Inner Or Outer, well exemplified by Weiderman's book
(1986), ' between two worlds'.
- 2
Development Or innate: this is the form detected by
Feldman (Feldman et al.,1994) in his chapter 'Creativity: proof that
development occurs,
'Simplicity', or 'origin' seemed to be either
'overlapping' (as in shift 2 above) or 'underlying', and 'restoring' something.
I postulated the 'third shift', which has proven very useful in chapter 1 and
2. I will reproduce here the complete picture:
/
Se(f
3
(Chapter 1 / Figure 2): The three shifts of 'New
Paradigm', from singular, to complex to complex-singular, to
simplicity
There are some more, which I cannot explain by either
shifts 2 or 3. For example:
- Temporary change Or permanent new state (in therapy,
creativity and spirituality).
In found my experience that an inner change is permanent
and involves results in the visible lifeworld only when it follows a deep
'shift' of consciousness ('prise de conscience' in French).
- Breakthrough, sudden shift, instantaneous
'transformation' Or preparation, conscious (voluntary, willed) daily practice
(including the 'as if' attitude), or 'development' (in psycho-spiritual
development)
I have not elucidated this problem yet, although I
suspect it has something to do with 'evolution'. I hope that chaos theory will
help me here. In the mean time, I want to come back to the third shift of New
Paradigm, which has important consequences. Let us look at the example of the
two types of spiritual schools. I have summarised the two sides of this
dichotomy, in the spiritual context of 'Awakening', in Figure 12:
'Spiritual practice'
(eg, J. Kornfield, 1993, Rowan,
1993)
"Awakened Living" "Awakening" Experience
(daily mindfulness, Love)
Does not necessarily lead to 'Power of Creation' Does not
necessarily lead to 'natural awareness'
--NATURAL AWARENESS-- --SELF AWARE--
Self-surrender (no-mind) Effortful
self-discipline
De-focused attention Focused attention
'OPEN STATE', WORLD-AWARE HIGHER MIND EN
VISIONING TO
CREATE
Present/Becoming
-se(f-aware-
Potentials of the present situation Possibilities of
the
GROUND OF MIND:
Creation
Power of
Extended Human Potential:
Aware of present as it is
BodyMindSelf': 'powers'-siddhis
Child-like Joie de vivre + wonder PRESENT
EXPERIENCE Creation (Active)
Non-doing -world-aware- Intuition (Receptive
listening)
Joie de Vivre
'Law of attraction'
"Love is a state of Becoming"
(Hawaiian "Aloha", "Love", "Tao")
(similarise/'grok')
Freud's oceanic paradise "I become what I
create"
Simp(icity: Comp(exity-Singu(arity:
The underlying ground of 'reality' as it is The many
possibilities of 'alternate realities'
Figure 12.- Two complementary understandings of the
characteristics of the 'spiritual' mind, based on
the New Paradigm
framework
The two types of schools of spiritual practice have two
types of goals: the sudden, 'enlightenment experience', or the permanent state
of 'enlightened living'. They have philosophical arguments about which is the
'true' enlightenment, and so which kind of practice is best. These correspond,
in my view to the third shift of New Paradigm.
I consider spiritual teachings in general are often
very confusing because they are too metaphorical to be very useful in
determining the next step of my learning so I can collaborate with the process.
They are also often conflicting. We are told of striking experiences, that can
'transform' the person or not (for example Anthony et al. 1987, p.188 - quoted
in Rowan, 1993, pp. 21-22) and of once-and-for all 'enlightenment'. We are also
told of a less striking but more profound state of awareness of the present
moment which changes attitudes to life, can be permanent, and is reached and
maintained by 'mindfulness' (eg, Kornfield, 1993). It can also take the form of
Maslow's 'plateau experience' (later Maslow: eg, Rowan, 1993, pp.46-50, and
Cleary & Shapiro, 1995), 'a state which we can call on at any moment, in
case of need' rather than 'a settled permanent state' (Rowan, 1993, p.24). The
difference between the two kinds of evolutions of experience is often not
clearly distinguished, and leads to controversies between spiritual masters as
well as transpersonalists. Sanella, for example tells of Da Free John's (Adi
Da) questions, which echo my own. The mystic had spent a lifetime looking for a
childhood state he called 'the bright', exploring the possibilities of the
human body-mind. He had found that
"Rudi 's (kundalini) yoga contradicted his own
intuition that the spiritual process is founded on self-surrender rather than
any effortful self-discipline," and "felt certain that that even the state of
unqualified ecstasy he had repeatedly experienced... was dependent on the
manipulation of the nervous system (referring to Kundalini). Therefore it could
not possibly be the same as 'enlightenment' or God-realization, which is
continuous." (Sanella, 1992, p126)
I had understood also that there are two ways:
'evolving the nervous system', which requires a high degree of
disciplined learning, or a surrender'. Rowan's
depiction of transpersonal states (1993) is underlined b y this idea: "All the
Zen people seem to go on about this same ideas - that enlightenment is a
once-for-all-or-nothing thing. And they are just wrong about this. It is an
oversimplication... What we (transpersonalists) are saying is that there is not
just one thing called enlightenment, and either you have got it or you have not
got it." (Rowan, 1993, p. 149).
Are Zen masters 'wrong' or do they only take a
different point of view, or have they a different motivation? But then again,
would they be 'right' in thinking they hold 'the' truth? I believe Rowan's
remark about the multiplicity of forms of 'enlightenment' suggests the two
forms I have just defined: Natural Awareness (requiring a surrender) and higher
human potential (an evolutionary stage requiring much learning). But I would
rather distinguish this from the issue of the instantaneous transformative
breakthrough, which I believe is a different and independent issue: It is not
clear whether 'breakthrough', and 'gradual' development or practice occur in
one or the two types of awareness/consciousness, but although there are links,
I see no reason to consider the two problems correlated directly.
3.4.2 The 'natural awareness' of the present': The
singularity/simplicity distinction
At first, I called what is on the left of the circle,
the mindful awareness of the present, a 'world-awareness' because it requires a
de-focused attention, rather than sharp focus. One also has to 'relax into it'
rather than try hard. When I read Thartang Tulku's (1977) name for it, 'Natural
Awareness', I thought it was even more appropriate and adopted it, because this
suggests that it is related to our being also animals: this relates to our
'ecological self'. With this kind of awareness, we have the same feeling as I
imagine my cat does: contentment when lying in the sun. In human terms, this
translates into the child-like joie de vivre we see in so many
spiritual masters... but also in children, and in many
little individuated individuals with small needs, people of the land in
particular, in simple people who are spontaneous and joyful. or in native
people. Two people helped me get an idea of what this is like. A farmer, and a
Hawaiian man, called Kalani, who belongs to a long line of shamans (but he has
not received his training, yet).
Kornfield recounts an insight of the Buddha that refers
to this natural awareness, bringing a joie de vivre :
"He remembered himself as a child seated under a rose
apple tree... how in that childlike state a natural sense of wholeness and
sufficiency was present. Seated as a child, he had already experienced the
calm, clarity, and natural unity of body and mind he was seeking. After
remembering this profound sense of wholeness, the Buddha changed his entire way
ofpractice. He began to nourish and honor his body and spirit (as opposed to
ascetic practices). " (Kornfield, 1993, p. 207).
Once established in a person's experience, this kind
of natural awareness seems either accessible on demand (eg,Maslow's 'plateau')
or a permanent state (eg,Da Free John). As Da Free John, I have also spent my
life longing and looking for the joie de vivre of my early years. He correlates
this directly to experiences of subtle energies because they were undissociable
in his experience, but I believe these are independent variables.
Working with all these questions and concepts, and
writing my thesis has brought me to a last minute distinction I feel I cannot
leave out because it is crucial. The 'simplicity' of this Natural Awareness is
of a fundamental, undifferentiated kind. It makes no separation. This is vastly
different from what the Western mind might understand by the term 'simple'. The
Western mind tends to separate things into discrete objects: it sees singular
objects. Singularity is, in nature, very different from what I mean here by
'simplicity'. In consequence, the second, integrative shift of New Paradigm
integrates singularity and complexity into a multi-level complex-singularity,
which I see as equivalent to fully developed 'individuality'. Single, but
connected. The third shift is different. It brings back an underlying awareness
of simplicity, of no-individuation at all. These are the terms I will use from
now on.
3.4.3 'Multi-tracking', higher mind and
'return'
'Higher mind' seems to imply that we must go beyond
systemic complexity, which is more a characteristic of a right-mind approach.
With the 'second shift, appears an overlapping, integrating 'singularity' that
appears 'above' the composite of complexity. What I call 'higher mind' seems to
mean becoming able to see both this overlapping singularity and the complexity
at the same time.
This process is shown clearly, in a transpersonal context
of practice of awareness, by a question to the meditator in Rowan's 'open
focus' exercise:
"Is it possible for you to imagine that at the same
time as you are attending to the space and the sounds you can also attend
simultaneously to any emotions, tensions, feelings or pains that might also be
present (in your experience right now)?" (Rowan, 1993, p.87)
This inclusion of sensations, perceptions, emotions,
thoughts, space etc., at the same time, into one single
heightened awareness of one's experience, both
singular and complex, is the same process that I underwent in my 'complex eye
movements' experience (see EE#8 in Appendix 3.3). It is a process by which I
believe we can come to a truly holistic experience and understanding (including
diversity-singularity and complexity).
Another way to formulate this complex awareness and
exercise it is described b y Jean Houston:
"We seem to be unnecessarily shackled to a serial view
of reality, moving doggedly in a single track until we painfully shift gears
and continue our journey on another single track. In doing so, we belie our
nature, our brain, and reality itself. For the world within and without is
multiple, various, and simultaneous....
"The autonomous functions of the brain's neural
networks could allow us to discriminate in full consciousness dozens, even
hundreds of separate functions and ideas (as in) certain states of
consciousness, especially those related to moments of high creativity or mystic
perception...
"This is 'automatic' and does not seem to involve
separate frames of conscious attention; it involves a gestalt of knowing and
requires little mental effort, little conscious attention, to appreciate the
whole in its many parts... We know on the subliminal level but have a difficult
time in getting this knowing across the threshold of our consciousness."
(Houston, 1982, pp. 72-73).
She calls this process 'multi-tracking' and the
exercise she proposes involves bodily motor coordination. This 'appreciation of
the whole in its many parts' is not only holistic, it also is being conscious
of the parts as well. The gestalt contains both whole and parts, both the
complex and the singulars. It is a result of the second paradigmatic shift. The
'multi-tracking' does not take effort, but requires exercises to learn. Trying
to do this exclusively with the sequential left-mind is very difficult... and
results in the 'brain-fry', which in my experience actually helps the relaxing
into autonomous, direct apprehension (see EE#9 in Appendix 3.3).
In my model, complex, purely holistic apprehension is
'right-mind' thought. The ego, as we conceive of it in the West, is roughly
equivalent to left-mind intellect and the psychology of the person. Without
this individuated self-consciousness, this would be how ancient peoples
perceived: it comes even before separating, left-mind individuality
apprehension. This would be 'pre-personal' in Ken Wilber's terminology, and the
separating, left-mind consciousness of being an individual (self-conscious
reflexivity) is 'personal'. Conscious but only holistic apprehension would
correspond to a putting of myth, storytelling and diversity at the pinnacle of
human experience, or to the '~ew Age drift' to psychic experience, which
requires holistic non-separation. This is 'right-mind' thought. This, Wilber
considers a confused return to the undifferentiated pre-personal, and Rowan
considers 'extra-personal'. I think there is a difference between the two ways
of using complex-holistic apprehension: the conscious awareness of the holistic
apprehension, trying to 'revert' separating individuality is not present in
ancient peoples. Self-consciousness makes the difference in the modern person.
So 'extra-personal' (beyond the personal) would be a better term.
'~ulti-tracking', on its part, seems to be a sophisticated human skill of yet a
higher order than the pre-personal, the personal-left-mind, or the
extra-personal-right-mind. It is developing a new, conscious mode of
experience, a higher skill that is not, apparently, accessible to the less
individuated people.
Another aspect of the '~ew Age drift' is worth
mentioning. It is my experience that many undiscriminating
'spiritual
people' (or trying to be) fall into an indulging emotionality (the 'fuzzy and
cuddly-but no-conflict'
syndrome). This attitude reveals a lack of personal
integration, which I think has confused Wilber. I distinguish the evolution of
'thinking skill' as I described above from the psychological process of
personality integration. I will come back to this. The 'Natural Awareness', on
its part, seems to be a very simple process, accessible to anyone, anytime, if
only one can remember what it was like to be a small child. One rekindles this
awareness b y relinquishing organised thinking altogether, by surrendering.
Psychologically, this may be felt as 'surrendering the ego', which uses
differentiated left-mind thought.
The present work may seem like 'a lot of intellectual
words' = It is, but it also has a function. If my framework has any validity,
all this change in human experience is accompanied with a higher sophistication
of our self-consciousness and of our thought processes. Just as a modern ego
needs more explanations than a primitive communal person, a higher mind will
require a yet more subtle understanding. I am undergoing the change myself, and
I feel I need this more refined understanding. This complicated understanding
is not a goal in itself, but I have found it a necessary step to undergo the
change in full self-consciousness. The arguments published in journals are a
witness to the fact that I am probably not the only one to feel this
need.
I believe these distinctions are important because
they explain the difficulty many people have with 'spiritual development'. It
seems to me that the 'struggle' that it is for so many is in good
part not inherent to the process as most believe, but
is caused by our lack of understanding of what is involved. In trying to
develop and maintain such subtle conscious awareness, of one kind or the other,
we are confused b y spiritual writings that rest on metaphoric formulations not
developed for the Western mind. (I do not dispute the adequacy of the knowledge
itself, but its formulation) As a result, many put great 'effort' into 'trying'
to hold the Natural Awareness of the present instead of relaxing into it, and
do all sorts of difficult practices 'to reach it', as Da Free John did. Others
try hard 'let go of ego' to become 'creator selves'Q without doing the ground
work of practice required for multi-tracking and they put emphasis on an
'oceanic' kind of connectedness instead of putting intent into being constantly
conscious of their complex and singular experience. Neither strategy works. I
have experienced these difficulties and dilemmas: Was I supposed to relax and
let go or adopt a drastic discipline? My choice to practice my method of
'conscious experiencing' rather than prescribed methods has led to the present
work, and to some measure of success, at last. The rest of this paper will show
how crucial it may be for our society to make such distinctions and, if they
are later confirmed, 'intersubjectively' validated, to popularise
them.
Why did I need to include this discussion in my work,
which is not centred on mystical experience? Because these two complementary
distinctions about 'mind' and 'spirituality' have led to my defining the 'third
shift' of New Paradigm, and because they give a more subtle picture of our
learning. This is also because the natural awareness of the present moment, of
reality as it is, is extremely relevant to an individual's daily life, in
interpersonal communication, in the creative ability. I now imagine the human
being at this time in history as being in an exciting process of learning in
two directions, and I want to determine whether both are necessary for the
driving-creating-learning force in us to blossom (Figure 13). These two
'directions' have a direct relationship to how we manage our attention or
focus.
3.4.4 'Direction A' for creative Action (refer to Figure
13)
The first I have called 'Direction A'. It corresponds
to learning a number of inner skills of mind, which can be extended into
learning about life energy, envisioning and about voluntarily effecting changes
in the world, thus 'co-creating' reality. This leads to an active stance in
life -- hence the label 'A', for creative action--. It corresponds to the
spiritual teachings based on 'growing' our sense of self to finally fully and
permanently identify with 'Higher Mind', the Transpersonal Self. It corresponds
also to the spiritual practices related to the body. It leads to many
extraordinary 'powers', or 'siddhis' as the transpersonal field likes to call
them (a term from Hinduism / Vedanta) that are now slowly being acknowledged as
the inherent potential of the human being (eg, Leonard & Murphy, 1992, and
Murphy, 1995, Harman & Rheingold, 1984, Houston, 1982, Krippner, 1996). The
breath particularly is considered intimately linked to the life energy
(involved in emotions, sexual energy, and kundalini/shamanic 'power'), which is
said to be required for creation, or 'manifestation'. This first direction
leads to complex experiences in altered states of consciousness and plainly
requires a complex 'mind training' and body discipline. This is the reason why
I defined earlier the notion of 'BodyMindSelf' that needs
educating.
On personal integration
These 'powers' may be misused. Many a spiritual
tradition warns that the 'powers' attached to direction A are addictive (that
is, for an unintegrated personality) and detract attention from the most
important: the mindful present. A complete psychological integration of
personality seems required for them to be used with ethical motivations, for
the benefit of all. Psychological integration seems to belong to the realm of
meaning, and to be independent from both higher mind development of direction A
and 'awareness' of direction B. The self is what allows us to give meaning, to
be 'self-conscious', and to be different from and have a 'higher potential'
animals do not have. This psychological integration is often overlooked by New
Age people, who confuse it with renewing their consciousness of attaching
psychological emotions to body feelings. This accounts for the 'emotional
indulgence' found in those circles, and has, in my view, nothing to do with any
of the mind development described here. It is independent, necessary, and often
overlooked, even b y some long-time meditators and some 'spiritual teachers'.
Greater freedom and peace can be gained from this integration, even without
direction A skills or direction B Natural Awareness. Here, in my view, Ken
Wilber's (1977) spectrum mixes two parallel developments into one. His model
was useful when it was devised, because it validated 'spiritual' experience to
the same degree as psychological or cognitive experience, and showed there was
a relationship between them -- but he assimilated them, did not differentiate
between their characteristics. Many models have tried to remedy this, rather
unsuccessfully, because they simply ignored some of the dichotomies that
puzzled me. I believe it is time to refine this, b y seeing parallel
developments in four spheres. As I will show.
3.4.5 'Direction B' of Becoming (refer to Figure
13)
The creative value of Natural Awareness
The second direction of learning I call 'Direction B'.
It corresponds to being aware of reality or 'the world as it
is', often formulated as 'being in the moment', or
'being here and now'. It represents being lucidly aware of the present
situation as it is (not as filtered through beliefs and other thought
patterns). Because this does not involve thought, it does not involve either
any sense of 'I' and 'reality' as fixed 'things' to be observed as separate
objects. One important characteristic of 'the moment' is that it changes: it is
a process of becoming (a Taoist idea that is rather popular in transpersonal
circles) -- hence the label 'B', for becoming--. Therefore, this kind of
awareness also means being able to see the potential in the present situation
--hence its usefulness for creativity--. It is very simple (although not easy
to conceive of for a Western mind), it is available to anyone, any time we
decide to be aware of it, if we only know how to access that awareness.
(Experiencing it once, consciously, is a great eye-opener). It only requires to
know about it, and to learn to relax the thinking activities of the mind (both
left- and right-minded). (The breath that relaxes is useful here). It accesses
perception directly, without the filter of intellect, and so is usually
perceived as clarity. Strangely enough, it is often called 'clarity of mind'
and I have experienced it as such (see EE#10 and 11 in Appendix 3.3). (I
believe 'perception' still involves the brain, its primitive part, but not the
cortex and 'thought' as such). It is non-personal, happens independently from
any sense of separate self, before it rather than beyond it. If anything, I
consider it 'prescendent' rather than transcendent or transpersonal. I
understand it leads to the 'mindful enlightenment' that is reputed to feel so
wonderfully 'ordinary', and so close to the way children experience their life.
I suspect there are several ways to experience it, depending on the sense of
self one has (which is a context, here), and on the state of development of
'subtle perceptions' (body context). It is characterised by the joie de vivre
we all have known in our first 2 to 4 years of life and which we spend our life
seeking again, in the form of 'happiness'. One saying, drawn from Buddhist
tradition, epitomises this:
"There is no Way. Happiness is the way."
It seems to me that this second direction (B), toward
mindfulness may be the easiest to reach... with proper reeducation. The other
direction (A) requires much work and is not necessarily of interest to
everybody. I do not see either direction as 'more important' than the other,
and I suppose the addiction comes if the powers are accessible to an individual
whose personality still contains many unconscious motivations. My sense is that
a person probably needs to develop both, in order to access fully the
possibilities of 'Higher Mind'. Nevertheless, direction A does not seem
necessary for a person with little 'individuation' to have a feeling of 'being
whole'.
I will discuss this later under the heading 'FlowA and
FlowB', and its consequences on our self-defensive and manipulative behaviours
at the end of this paper.
The psychological value of Natural Awareness
Rowan's discussion of Andrew Neher's doubts about the
transpersonal (Rowan, 1993, pp.211 and 115) will help me show this value. Neher
views many meditative experiences as simply a 'dehabituation' (meaning that
familiar objects suddenly look unfamiliar and fresh to our perception) and
Rowan considers them 'not transpersonal' if there is an 'I' (meaning a personal
'I', be it a Higher Self) experiencing this. Neher then describes a second
kind, 'non-conceptual attention', also common in the types of experiences
described as 'flow' in sports, performance etc., and Rowan sees these as
'transpersonal'. Personally, I see them as the same direct
perception of the moment, independent of mind, which
we may have as a 'personal-ego-self', as a 'Higher Self' or 'Witness' or
'transpersonal self', or as no 'I' at all. It is the 'Natural Awareness'. I
think the perceptual experience and the sense of self are two independent
things and I would not accept Rowan's hierarchy here. But I do not accept
either Neher's position which trivialises the non-conceptual attention of
Natural Awareness and strips it of its meaning, and of the
desirability to cultivate it. I had such an experience
(an ERE) as a 17 year old gymnast. While in a precarious position on a beam, my
whole being went into autonomous mode, and achieved on that day a performance
that was no mean feat, and was never repeated.
It probably saved my life or at least saved me complete
paralysis. But this was not only a physical performance. It changed
me.
I felt that day that there was an absolutely efficient
natural mechanism in my body, aimed at survival. From then on, I never doubted
again my ability to survive physically, or to cope with physical danger. I was
not psychologically integrated, and my spiritual stirrings were being
systematically crushed, but my view of myself was transformed forever. My
childhood certainty in my physical capacity was restored and when, years later,
I became somewhat disconnected from Nature and from my body, by living a fast
city life in Paris, I found enough sense to see it and remedy that. Many city
people do not, and feel totally lost.
On models of 'consciousness'
To come back to the refinement of Wilber's model (the
most comprehensive), I believe the past 20 years have struggled enough with
many dichotomies to make it possible to now make new distinctions, seeing
parallel developments in three spheres:
Psychological Meaning:
'Self'
self-consciousness
Attention
Perception
BodyMind
In the sphere of 'meaning' and 'self-consciousness',
is the psychological personality that can be integrated. This is required for
our ethical development and for the conscious development of both higher mind
functions and the creative use of Natural Awareness. This corresponds to the
central circle of 'self' in my New Paradigm diagram, Figure 2 in chapter 1
(reproduced here on page 50).
In the sphere of cognitive abilities (deemed to make
use of the brain), we find the conventional intellect, but also the higher mind
functions of the 'second paradigmatic shift' of mind, the direction A abilities
(including 'direct knowing'), which are uniquely human. These make new use not
only of the brain, but of the entire BodyMindSelf, and would include 'light'
experiences, for example, as well as 'extra-personal', psychic
perceptions.
In the sphere of attention and perception, we find the
common 'consensus reality' which now appears to
constitute a great limitation. Direction B direct
perception, or Natural Awareness, is a 'recovering' of something available to
ancient people and to animals. But when it is rekindled with the aid of full
self-consciousness, we have the 'third paradigmatic shift'. We become able to
re-access direct perceptual experiences of levels of the physical reality we do
not 'normally' see or feel, and to use them in creative ways.
I place creativity as one link between these spheres,
and it involves 'spiritual love', understood as an inclusive and compassionate
emotion (psychological meaning), that is also an empathic energy (BodyMind) and
is also a direct awareness of the other (more to come in
Conclusions).
I now have some more questions: Is Natural Awareness
necessary for 'higher mind' functions to operate to their best potential of
'creation'?. Is it possible to have a clear consciousness of all parts and
aspects of the multidimensional experience at the same time: the singularity of
objects, the holistic complexity, the complex-singularity of emergence, and the
underlying simplicity/essentialness/oneness of it all? I will explore these...
later.
| 
