I suggest reading the earliest posts first

What is the relationship of the experience of synchronicities?

What is the relationship of the experience of synchronicities to the 'rational'? That question has been answered:

"Accompanying the more profound occurrences of synchronicity (is) a dawning intuition, sometimes described as having the character of a spiritual awakening, that the individual herself or himself not only is embedded in a larger ground of meaning and purpose, but also in some sense (is) a focus of it."
Richard Tarnas Cosmos and Psyche

The above quotation is embedded in 492 pages + 50 pages of endnotes, etc, little bitty print, not many pictures in the book.

"There is another world, but it is 'in' this one." Paul Eluard, Morris Berman, The Reenchantment of the World"

"Here again the dialectic that runs through the whole development of the mythical-religious consciousness stands out with particular sharpness....It is a fundmantal trait in mythical thinking that where ever it posits a definite relation between two members it transforms this relation into an identity. An attempted synthesis leads here necessarily to a coincidence, an immediate concrescence of the elements that were to be linked. " Ernst Cassirer, page 250, The Philosophy of symbolic Forms, Vol 2.

Concrescence is a term coined by Alfred North Whitehead
to show the process of jointly forming an actual entity that was without form, but about to manifest itself ...

"I saw not with the eye of the body, but the eye of the soul." Goethe; Theodore Reik's Fragment of a Great Confession

In discovering the other world, the hidden world, a very strange kind of conversation can be experienced but it's not the typical 'voice' that speaks in that other world. It's created artificially! It uses whatever is available to the individual, the specific individual.

This quotation is from War In Heaven by Charles Williams.

"When Mr. Batesby had spoken that morning it had seemed as if two streams of things: actual events and his own meditations had flowed gently together; as if not he but Life were solving the problem in the natural process of the world. He reminded himself now that such a simplicity was unlikely; explanations did not lucidly arise from mere accidents and present themselves as all but an ordered whole."
Read only the words in Bold-red. and that's the best example I can give of the process of 'abstraction' from embeddedness. This is an excellent description of synchronization as a life process. One's own meditations and actual events flow together and a new 'voice' speaks through this natural process.

Its an individualizing experience in every day life that has been named various names throughout history. C. G. Jung named it individuation, Emanuel Swedenborg had accurately identifed it as regeneration, a process that includes a life review.
An individuation process is not commonly recognized because its such a unique personalized life experience of one's own body and mind. You may be as surprised as I was to have to learn that the 'irrational' is what can't be scientifically validated because it's unique, ultra personal experiences that happen over a life span and science requires repeatability.
So the irrational is what ever isn't rational because science excludes personal analysis, the process requires repeatability. In fact the irrational is a wholeness of experience in that it includes the rational when the individuation process operates in a life or in lives. An individuation process is not commonly understood yet but I became aware of the process and the pattern without knowing about it myself!
How it creates a 'voice' and a conversation is the most personalizing life experience that can be experienced if it's recognized, because the form of its 'speech' is difficult to be discerned. Order emerges from chaos, literally over a span of time that may be decades in a life. It's speech is created artificially, the 'voice' aspect is created by a process of abstractions from every day life content. The bibliography at the end of a technical non-fictional book is in my opinion the result of that process of abstractions, its basically invisible to the author.
When quantum physics was 'discovered' that was a message that 'said': "The physical world is derived from another world" and: " there are no causes in the physical world, only effects." (Emanuel Swedenborg had already written that fact and other important details about the process of life, regeneration was his name for it, that he believed prepared a person for life after death.) One attribute of its speech is symbolic but literalness is also part of how the' voice' is created by a process literally of 'abstractions' , highlighted by the mind from every day life content, by a special function of mind that creates a 'second under lying context' automatically, with an extra 'sense'. The term 'second underlying context' was my own definition but a local Jungian psycyhiatrist told me it was an excellent term. Swedenborg's term, 'double thought' is appropriate too.

Only last year I saw an old movie (Blade Runner) and the process of 'abstraction' caused me to hear a remark made in it about 'tears lost in rain' with that 'extra meaningful sense' that I've noticed myself in my mind. It has helped me describe the undescribable invisibility of such events that occur, embedded in every day life until the 'extra sense' abstracts and highlights them. The 'jokes' that cause you to laugh most heartily are the simplest example I can give now. Television situation comedies in our time are popular from this mechanism's operations but that's just one of 'its' attributes.

There is a kind of rational logic inherent to the process, not Aristolean, or linear, because 'it' uses personal memories and experiences as the content of the process. But that's a fact that had to be recognized over a span of time when 'it' created in my life a consistent synchronization between inner content that was new to me, certain memories from my past and everything, every thing, outside my body.
The process itself was almost overwhelming for a few years until it was a new kind of 'normal', but not yet invisible. What's new eventually becomes normal but whatever is normal gets to be invisible eventually, its ever presence has made it invisible.

The process as I had to figure out myself, operates 'in' every day events. I believe it is a special sense that unites (synchronizes is the best word to use) the body and brain with what's outside the body, history and Time itself with the flow of what I believe is the 'ongoing endeavor of Time'. It may be a function of the unconsciousness itself to create the process of individuation, from the depths of mind but I'm not sure about that. But let me emphasize that I had to discover all, every 'bit of information' myself and notice how it was created from mechanisms of mind that alter 'thought' and the direction of attention. The most difficult to discover was that there is a kind of 'prompter within'. It created a new relationship with every day life events gradually.'

" The medium is the message." The extension in Time of an idea can be 'like' a signal, in my opinion.

The process of individuation is virtually unknown but I have experienced that the 'transcendental function' is in charge, it's building a future event: The Future. Sometimes long strings of events have to happen, widely spaced in time so that the personal 'meaning and context' can in some situations only be given decades later. I've had several events, separated by even decades happen, then a 'closing event ' completes the string and then an inner display retrieves them and assembles them in a flash of a second as 'insight'. Only then suddenly, it's obvious that part of me in the past somehow 'knew' the future.

I wouldn't abandon 'string theory' which F. David Peat wrote is an 'interactive force'. He did not write about or mention a process of individuation. I will have to describe in detail why I believe Sigmund Freud's 'discovery' of psychoanalysis was his experience of this individuation process and Carl G. Jung's much deeper experience was the result of recognizing the effects of the same pattern.

What ever "it" is that energizes my body in that 'kind' of event, which often happens as an ordinary situation, it's not always 'numinous' (feelable at the moment) or even unusual. It's 'feelable' when a creative 'function' of the unconscious mind that is not unconscious its self., 'highlights' the event or the memory of an event. I know it never sleeps, I've had more than acceptable evidence of that fact. That's where its possible to see evidence of foresight, when I see what happened when I was 'moved' by that function in certain specific events and finally realized I'd been alone when many of them happened.

The depths of mind is where an unsleeping part of me (and probably everyone else) is at work. Nothing materially changes but 'associations and understanding'. Its nearly impossible to detect that there's a vast space between upper regions of mind and the most remote regions of mind that produces content that is thankfully strangely visible. It uses symbols that the individual 'knows' or can recognize.

My main symbol is the moebius band in all it's forms. An impulse caused me to make my first one in 1941 when I was 9 years old. The same impulse caused me to discover its 'secret', it's hidden forms that day after I'd made the band with a 180 degree turn. "Cut around it lengthwise." was a thought and I cut it once lengthwise, surprised at the result. The thought words repeated : "Cut around it lengthwise." so I obeyed again. The result was two bands separated but joined in a knot that didn't look like it could be undone. The two bands were joined but separated. The impulse has caused me to look over my shoulder at just the right moment, in the right location and what it brings to my attention is ALWAYS a surprise, sometimes its a real shock, perfectly timed.

It's connected to a part of 'me' that knows where I am, what's in front of me, where I've been and 'it' knows my most private thought. That part evidently knows the future, it has foresight and 'it' or whatever it's connected to uses a different language than our words. But it's within me, looking through my eyes, and I'm not unusual.

The four world balloon was created from an impulse to do something irrational.

About the image of 4 balloons?

I had an impulse to create my own image to represent (re-present) of the four worlds that William Blake's Tree of Life allegory had brought to my mind. I described what I wanted to a young man in a craft store and he thought it was impossible to do what I had in mind. Yet he did it without too much trouble then he made one for himself.

Search This Blog

Sunday, November 7, 2010

A Sunday Morning in November, revised 11-15-2010

"Somebody said that it couldn't be done, at least nobody ever has done it." Edgar Guest.

“It is possible to believe that all the past is but the beginning of a beginning, and that all that is and has been is but the twilight of the dawn. It is possible to believe that all the human mind has ever accomplished is but the dream before the awakening”—H. G. Wells, 24 January 1902, lecture given at the Royal Institute, London. “The Discovery of the Future”.

I believe everyone has an opportunity to do something in life  that nobody has ever done before, it's our reason for being and becoming an individual. Emanuel Swedenborg wrote that every person has a particular 'genius' which I interpret to mean a particular task in life,  that no other person has. That's probably where the processes of individuation occur. Discovering a process of life that individualizes every event has been a small part of my task in life but it's our collective task also.  Recognizing it was being shown to me was the larger part, I didn't go looking for anything. I now believe we each and all are required to locate that 'sequestered hidden world within' because that's where the task is revealed,  in the very deeps of our mind.  Emanuel Swedenborg named the process accurately it seems to me,  as  'regeneration'  because he believed life in the body is preparation for life after death. He was given evidence that's convincing to me now  although if I'd not read Robert Monroe's Journeys Out of Body and Far Journey's before reading anything Swedenborg wrote, I'm sure I would have felt differently. They both described mental adventures that happened 'while yet in their bed'.  Swedenborg wrote that what happens in life and the choices that are made in life determine what  life after life in the body will be.

 I know that the process happens in life  as a  'life re-view' literally, but it's not like someone announces it, that has to be discovered.  "What a gift ye give us, to see ourselves as others see us." W. B. Yeats

Ira Progoff's The Dynamics of Hope, Perspectives  of Process in Anxiety and Creativity, Imagery and Dreams is in my opinion a great book, and  is the result of his recognition of that process in his life. I remember reading Monica Furlong's The End Of Our Exploring, an exploration by a young woman of the various paths in life at time when it was a path I didn't suspect or know anything about. You don't have to be a genius, just be willing to learn and change your mind.

This morning I watched Sunday Morning on Channel 7 which is one of my favorite shows usually. Several segments were especially meaningful to me, and relevant to the task I have reason to believe was assigned to me before I was born. We may be information in a body! One episode in particular was about soldiers who  were denied Medal of Honor awards because forsenic tests done in an autopsy were accepted as evidence that didn't support what  eye witnesses had said happened. There was a specific incident, a specific soldier shielded his men and saved them  from a grenade, they reported it themselves, but forsenics 'proved' otherwise. Forsenics proved that consciouness could not have caused  the act of heroism to be done. I fumed about how 'analysis and statistics' over ruled witnesses and real live experiencers report, I've had that happen to me too often.

Later, as I went about making my bed I thought about wars and what is required of men. That  reminded me of an incident that happened in 1964. We had just moved  to Seattle from Indiana. I was washing dishes when I heard my 5 years old son call to me. He was watching the news, war news. "Mommie, how do the soldiers in airplanes that are throwing bombs down and shooting guns know who the bad people are?" It's a question  I'd not asked my self, so I just told him they had no way of knowing who the bad people were."Some good people get killed accidentally."

"I don't ever want to be a soldier, mommie." he said.

I remember feeling a degree of shock that he wasn't patriotic and that I had not taught him patriotism! I remember feeling a kind of horror that he would say he didn't ever want to be a soldier! Later when war protesters arose from his generation I thought there must have been other little boys watching the news and they asked their mother the question that son had asked me. Maybe they got the same answer and made the same decision. He was watching the news  not long after that when he called to me. "MOMMIE, some bad guy shot Mr. Kennedy."
I had to realize this morning  how  at less than 6 years old, he had seen news happen and thought about things I'd never thought about when I was half a century old. Seeing something happen rather than just reading about it made a big difference, probably.
But there may be some truth to the idea of destiny. By that  I mean  that what needs to happen in Time does happen, but  when its supposed to happen and only then.  So our family Destiny might have  prevented me from inquiring until later in life about what a very young boy noticed and wondered aloud to me about.  I also remembered that when he played with his blocks one morning he got up, chuckling to himself as he toddled off to the kitchen: "Something in my head told me to get a drink of water." I remember thinking that seemed a strange thing for an 18 months old toddler to say. "Something in my head told me to get a drink of water." ???
I have come to believe in destiny or something like a Great Plan in life in which we enter if we can become conscious enough of  the prime initiator, which is curiosity and a need to find a truth about some trivial seeming detail in real life. It's a need  that's so great that after it's switched on permanently it  operates like a motor aimed at locating the truth in a specific life in very specific circumstances. My search for truth required  lack of curiosity for more than half a century. Then the 'switch' was turned on pemanently. At this point I'm  somewhat amused at my self, at times because  I feel a toddler like fascination and insatiable curiosity about everything.  That's a fact about old age that I didn't suspect.

Another segment on this Sunday Morning was about Madame Curie and her double  Nobel Prize awards in science.  What arose in my mind then was that there should be an award for people like me who don't go into higher education, never went into a laboratory, never did scientific experiements but who feel somehow they have made a discovery in their life that nobody else has written about, that we do have connection to an intelligence other than our own. "Work done for another level." That's  the way P. D. Ouspensky seemed to me to have described  his experience with that kind of participation in the 'Larger Domain' of life;  his task  was searching for a way to get  new information.

Those of us who lived the events in  their life and tried to understand them; even could prove them in the scienific mode if individual truth can be proved, experience rejection and being labeled a crank or worse.
Trying to prove my personal interpretations when it was necessary to find out whether I imagine things or not was only possible after the sense of needing to find the truth in real life was activated permanently. That didn't happen when I was 6 years old. Some situations in real life  happened but a new sense made that kind of need for truth was not only possible but very, very necessary. It seemed to be a new sense until I found out it's an old sense, it's really a  pattern. Pattern recognition may be what I have been directed to notice, I don't claim to have noticed it myself.

 Wanting recognition seems to be part of the 'drive' behind the search for truth; especially when  the search results in  facts that  displace much that's been accepted as truth by the collective. The mind itself has to be the object of study and most individuals do not feel driven to understand their own mind, or to become 'psychoanalytic' to the degree Freud, Jung, Swedenborg  and William Blake accomplished in their individualized life. A strange detachment from the body creates 'self observation' from either the depths or  some Other that's got a goal of it's own. There seems to be constant consciousness on that level, it's not asleep, ever. There are points in the past where radical changes occurred when a  new idea occurred in the mind of at least one man.
 This morning's segment about Madame Curie was an exception to the usual rule. I thought about what a lucky person she was to marry a scientist, they didn't war between themselves about some of the gender based issues I've confronted.

Last week I read Tolerance, The story of man's struggle to think by Hendrik Van Loon, and that caused me to consider my own past, which is about the incredible struggle of a woman to think independently, to think what has never been thought by anyone else.  Where do ideas come from?" is the question, can that be explained by scientific analysis?
In the mid 1990's I read a book, The Arrow of Time that reported how  Ludwig Boltzmann could not bear the very great torment of knowing he was 'right'  and ended himself just before his idea began to be accepted by his peers. I know there must be other examples that I don't know about of how difficult it is to be 'certain without doubt' and find no, or not much validation.

I've read books authored by individuals who never became famous yet their book contained information that was more valuable than an encyclopedia of information! Sometimes the information made no sense when I read the book, years of experience had to happen before the book made sense. (Bond of Power by Joseph Chilton Pearce, which was re-issued under a different name, The Biology of Transcendence; Ira Progoff's The Symbolic and The Real are two examples.)
Sometimes the book  verified my own experiences exactly and I felt a very great relief and thankfulness coupled with an anguish of frustration. Why should such information be available and so few people know about it? Why do people quarrel about every thing they don't agree with? (Ira Progoff's The Dynamics of Hope; Maurice Nicolls' Living Time and Integration of the Life; The Re-Creating of the Individual by Beatice Hinkle are examples of that kind of validating book. )

There was yet a third kind of book which after I read it caused me to close it and then my mind seemed to 'use' or 're-use' the ideas in the book and present the authors ideas in a completely different context than the author had done. Such a book was The Lord of Thought by Emmett and Dougall which I've already mentioned but The Phenomonen of Man by Teilhard de Chardin had been one book that my mind seemed to select to give me information that the author had not explicitly included in his own book. I felt an explosion of information I'd not thought about ever, even once in my life about how 'man' has not been categorized, classified and how difficult it would be for 'man' to 'see' his own life the way we see animals and other living and non living objects.

I had to create a name that kind of explosion of inner content because there was a demand to 'name what you see, describe what you see' included in it. I named them 'mindquakes' but it's very likely other authors used more well known, more  scholarly words whose meanings are  obscure to individuals like me.
 It seems to me at this point that a certain 'sense' has to be active to some degree or to an excessive degree that initiates a search for and a need to establish what is true in the individual life.

 I felt that those of us who quarrel with the  science of the collective, and who survived with enough sanity intact to function somewhat usefully and decently should have a category in the Nobel Prizes.

 "Somebody said that it couldn't be done, at least nobody ever has done it." Edgar Guest. It could be done.

No comments: