Epiphany (Part 2)

Begin at the end, but don’t stop at the beginning.

?

The more common ah ha experience of seeing a solution after letting go of thinking about a problem, say sleeping with a problem overnight, then the solution occurs to you when you wake up the next morning, is like the less common, but much more profound epiphany, in one important respect. In both experiences, you see the end at the beginning. After seeing the end, say the solution in ah ha, or the whole gestalt image in epiphany, you then follow the path from the beginning and fill in all the steps arriving at the conclusion. Human beings use this same function of consciousness living each day of their lives, for instance by having a vision. With vision, the end comes first, then you figure out how to create-manifest your vision, one step at a time.

?

James Cameron is an iconic American film maker whose filmography includes Titanic and Avatar. Titanic and the two Avatar movies are the top three highest profit-grossing films of all time. Cameron makes good use of epiphany.

?

“Cameron’s best ideas come to him in his dreams. The filmmaker often quips that he has a free streaming service running in his mind every night. He wakes up, sketches, and retroactively constructs a narrative to reach the image in his mind’s eye. The Terminator was born from a vision of the killing machine’s endoskeleton. He manifested Avatar after a dream about a bioluminescent forest.” Elian Dockrerman[1]

?

Vision create-manifest, ah ha problem solutions, epiphany seeing whole gestalt images of densely packed encoded information, and revelations are all known functions of ego consciousness. These functions of ego consciousness create-manifest the paths, 1) from near-existence to actual-existence, 2) from quantum-scale to macro-scale, 3) from invisible to visible, 4) from does-not-exist to does-exist, 5) from possible-to-exist to actually-exists, 6) from probability-of-existence to actual-existence, 7) from consciousness to physical.

?

If epiphany rises to the level of revelation, it qualifies as knowledge through identity, equivalent to enlightenment, which in Buddhism is also called contemplation. By comparison, intellectual knowledge is like a candle to full sunshine.

?

In 2008 I had an experience. I arrived at the top of the mountain and passed over to the other side. I did not stay there. I came back into my physical body soon enough; sooner than I would have preferred! That journey was in consciousness, climbing the inner spiritual mountain, not a physical mountain climbing excursion. Wherever my body was my consciousness was present also, but it was consciousness that made the journey and had the experience, not my physical body/brain/central nervous system organism.

?

The experience was not entirely positive, and not particularly blissful, as other experiences I have had, have been, for instance Tantric experiences of union with my beloved wife, union with superconsciousness and union with eternal. In some ways it was profoundly disturbing to my ego, overwhelming and frightening. Afterwards, for years but not always, I could feel confused, frustrated, inadequate and afraid. At times I also felt enlightened, exalted, powerful beyond belief, extraordinary, beautiful, filled with joy, bliss, and happiness.

?

After more than 10 years of processing that experience, the epiphanies began. I started to see with gestalt images, whole images densely infused with ordered information that communicated knowledge. This book is the cumulative result of that inner illumination experience and the epiphanies that followed. My report is far from infallible. When I can see with inner illumination, I feel certainty about the truth of what I see and know. When I slip back into the relative darkness of ego consciousness applying discursive thought, I doubt my own vision.

?

Jnana yoga is a spiritual path of knowledge. Illumination of enlightenment that is primarily exaltation of knowing (see, grok, to have knowledge), is the experience when enself merges with dark superconsciousness; that merging is a holographic equivalence relation. That experience is distinct from Tantra yoga illumination of enlightenment that is primarily affective exaltation of feeling, saturated with bliss, joy and happiness, typically when physical masculine unites with physical feminine, the yin/yang unity in Taoism. Jnana yoga, and Tantra yoga are also distinct from Raja yoga illumination of direct experience exaltation of being (contemplation), which is inclusive of all other kinds of yoga. All forms of yoga are monism yoga, which means direct experience knowledge that everything is one thing, which feels like I AM THAT, which is literally a direct sentient feeling experience of ultimately simultaneous. Enself is one of five ultimately simultaneous mediums in my cosmology.

?

It would be coherent to describe epiphany as a kind of intelligence, but I do not endorse that interpretation. Epiphany seems to be in simplicity, surrendering to receive information from outside your normal ego consciousness. Epiphany means ego consciousness surrenders to enself, thus permitting what I call seeing without eyes which is inner seeing or seeing in the dark; very much like using physical eyes to take in the information from a vast landscape looking out from a mountain ledge taking in the totality of the image all-at-once. I do not mean that is easy to do, but I believe it is possible for most ordinary human beings, say with average IQs, to learn how to do it. It is simple, nevertheless, it only seems easy with some degree of mastery.

?

I experienced the illumination directly, not primarily a cognitive thought experience, and not primarily a feeling experience, rather an experience of being (Raja Yoga contemplation). I found that which is looking, and it was myself = enself; the essence identity of myself = soul, in a form that was pure immaterial self-aware consciousness. Consciousness shrank to a dot and simultaneously expanded without bound. The awakening did not stop there. The next instant, expansion of myself continued far beyond anything that could possibly be claimed to be personal or private. This self-knowledge = knowledge of myself = enself, was a difference of kind, not a difference of degree. Enself is a category, inclusive of 1) “I” = ego identity; 2) physical self, the body/brain/central nervous system organism; and 3) enself, expansion of my private ego consciousness to holographic identity with the collective ego consciousness commons, which literally also was known to include everything external (extrinsic) to the private I-ego and I-physical. Those three are a holon unity of wholeness. The three are instances of the same category of existence. I knew with certainty, enself to be = contemplation, invulnerable, indestructible, inviolable, irreducible, lovable, and capable of loving. Enself is manifested actual infinity, actual substance, not the pretend physical kind, not appearance only = illusion kind. All kinds of consciousness are substantial because all kinds of human consciousness have the power create-manifest. I understood by direct knowledge with no separation between knower and known (being, contemplation), that enself is conserved. I knew with certainty that no physical location and no action at any location could affect enself in any way. I knew that time had absolutely nothing to do with enself. I know with certainty that enself cannot die. I understood that my mind, which I define as a physical body/brain/central nervous system docked to a private ego consciousness unit, would all perish, including loss of all the accumulated ordered information of that lifecycle, at the instant of physical death. I mean that only the physical would die, however ego consciousness would not perish, it would simply be reabsorbed by superconsciousness from which it was genesis-created.

?

The experience was stupendous! Have you had that? Are you interested in having that? The sign on the Yogi’s door read “Enquire Within.”

??

Having epiphanies does not mean you are smarter or that you have a higher IQ. The knowledge you gain from epiphanies can seem like intelligence, but epiphanies and intelligence are a category distinction; difference of kind, not difference of degree, as methods of knowing. Epiphanies are knowledge of knowledge, meta-knowledge. I would say they are not thinking at all, even though both thinking, and epiphany do reveal knowledge, which is organized information and bestowal of meaning upon that information.

?

Epiphanies are not personal at all, but thinking is totally personal. Epiphanies come to your ego consciousness via intermediary witness consciousness. Witness consciousness has unlimited access to superconsciousness, which makes it possible for superconsciousness to transmit information through witness consciousness as injections to ego consciousness. However, surrender of ego self-importance is required, mere cognitive effort is not sufficient if you intend to clear blockages and permit epiphanies to enter ego conscious awareness.

?

On the one hand, epiphany is intrinsic to my ego consciousness. Without ego consciousness epiphany would be impossible. There is a part that I intentionally play by preparing myself to receive epiphanies, including a personal method of concentration, meditation, and surrender, which with mastery permits, but does not cause, the direct sentient experience of being-contemplation. Bestowing meaning upon the information revealed in the epiphany makes epiphany personal, and it is proper to take some satisfaction in knowing that the part I play has an effect that I actively seek.

?

On the other hand, it is equally clear that epiphany is an extrinsic infusion/injection into my ego consciousness from outside my ego-self. For example, I am certain that epiphany is not the result or my ordinary discursive thought. The extrinsic infusion part of epiphany is not personal, it does not necessarily conform to anything I am currently thinking about or researching, although that is common. Furthermore, even when it does correspond to something I have been thinking about or researching, epiphany is virtually never in any recognizable ordered sequential linear logic, rather, the epiphanies jump all over the place.

Epiphany is not intrinsic, but not, not intrinsic to my ego consciousness. Epiphany is not extrinsic, but not, not extrinsic to my ego consciousness.

?

At times while writing this book my feeling was impatient. After years of researching and writing, I wanted to finish the book, but I knew it was not yet finished. I got to the point where I was thinking to myself, “I will know when the book is finished.” Then I realized the epiphanic process would never end. Therefore, it was most accurate to say I would know when to cut off the writing and submit the book to readers.

?

In the first couple of years writing this manuscript, I was frequently fearful the epiphanies would stop, but that fearfulness resulted directly from my interpretation that I, limited to ego consciousness, not yet expanded to enself, could take full credit for being smart. I would tend to get all puffed-up with self-importance and then crash equally hard, filled with self-doubts.

?

Sometime toward the third year of writing, after having many more repetitions of epiphany, and full realization of enself, I got clear about the not, not logic distinction, for instance, not intrinsic, and not, not intrinsic; not extrinsic and not, not extrinsic, and eventually I knew with relative certainty, the epiphanies would not stop until my death, or Alzheimer’s, whichever came first.

?

Epiphany is not something ego consciousness does, but not, not something ego consciousness does. Epiphany is not something ego consciousness experiences, but not, not something ego consciousness experiences. For me epiphany is mostly something I experience rather than something I make happen. In that sense, epiphany is like a music concert, not something I create, but something I participate in. Of course, I must choose to attend the concert, but that seems like a rather small part of the total concert experience.

?

Epiphany is generated by active agent witness/observer/doer consciousness. Witness accesses superconsciousness and injects that information into ego consciousness through epiphany. Witness consciousness always accepts direction from ego consciousness, about what to find in superconsciousness, hence the spiritual directive: be careful of what you think about, because you are going to get more of it. Epiphanies are holographic and M?bius entangled. Information communicated through epiphany is coded, super-condensed, and is decoded, unpacked, interpreted, analyzed, reviewed, etc., by ego-consciousness, which bestows interpretations of meaning, purpose, and usefulness.

?

Epiphanies are common; virtually all humans experience ah-ha moments which are mini-epiphanies, and most experience more profound epiphanies throughout their lives. Anyone can set the stage for experiencing more epiphanies by psychologically letting go of control, and with some form of meditation, go quiet, still, and tranquil inside. This still, quiet, tranquil inner space allows information to come into your ego awareness from witness consciousness commons, from infinite superconsciousness, from eternal Aseity.

?

“He who bends to himself a joy doth the winged life destroy, but he who kisses the joy as it flies lives in Eternity’s sunrise.” William Blake

?

Experiences of epiphany are instances in which the lower ego-self opens to inputs from its higher self, including enself (ego consciousness commons), witness consciousness commons, and superconsciousness. Epiphanies bring into play all levels of consciousness simultaneously, including superconsciousness + witness consciousness commons + ego consciousness = one undivided whole consciousness.

?

Consciousness of consciousness, and awareness of awareness, is profound epiphany, but almost universally available to everyone. Consciousness of consciousness, awareness of awareness, is so common = ultimately simple, that it is mostly just taken for granted; not really appreciated for the powerful experience it is. Without that experience, a human being is like a fish that does not know it exists within water. Consciousness of consciousness is as simple as, not only are you reading this manuscript, but you also know that you are reading this manuscript. That kind of knowing is what witness-observer-doer consciousness is doing.

?

Epiphany is independent of intelligence as measured by IQ. High intelligence does not correlate with more frequent or profound epiphanies. Suspending rigid frameworks (scaffolds, paradigms), of beliefs and assumptions, ideas with which we think and perceive, is highly correlated with frequency and power of epiphanies. Commonly, those among us with the highest IQs tend to remain stuck in cages of their own creation, glued fast to a set of incorrect beliefs and over-beliefs such as physicalism [= reductionism + atomism + materialism + mechanistic + determinism + physical causality + positivism + fatalism]. Such a scaffold of metaphysical ideas can all too easily block the most profound epiphanies.

?

Perception, Epiphany, Subjective, Objective, Cognitive, Affective, and Sensual

?

Personal experience is direct knowledge (experience knowledge), not just knowledge of experience. Knowing is always simultaneously subjective, objective, cognitive, affective, and sensual. Knowledge is always subjective, which simply means, without consciousness, there is no knowledge. Furthermore, it is obvious, consensus is required to confirm the objective accuracy of all knowledge. Consensus is required to establish truth value of any meaning that is bestowed by ego consciousness.??

?

Epiphany is a feeling. Feeling is direct sentient affective experience knowledge. It is hard to imagine anyone who has ever had an epiphany would deny that is true. I certainly do not mean that is all epiphany is, but the feeling part of epiphany commonly gets left out of any description of what epiphany is. Most of the attention goes to the cognitive information, say ideas, and sets of ideas, revealed in epiphany, such as the solution to the problem (an abstract ordering of information into bestowal of meaning). What I am suggesting is that sentient feeling is a kind of information (epistemological affective information), quite distinct from cognitive idea abstraction epistemological information that may result from thinking about some topic. Feeling is bestowal of meaning upon information, quite equivalent with cognitive bestowal of meaning, and at least equally important, powerful, and necessary, for clarity of understanding.

?

I suggest epiphany is meta-proof, which means proof of proof, which is grounded ultimately in the sentient ah ha affective feeling of certainty. I have observed that it is only when the ideas revealed in any epiphany are accompanied by that feeling, or set of feelings, like exalted excitement, wonder, pleasure, joy, happiness, that I know the ideas have truth value and I can be confident in the logic and coherence of the ideas.

?

Feeling that is associated with the expanded consciousness of epiphany, is quite beyond the ordinary psychological feelings that come and go in drunken-monkey consciousness. Drunken-monkey level of feeling is not any reliable guide to decision-making, choice, or certainty of knowing.

?

In fact, in any epiphany that I have experienced, it would be impossible to say if the feeling precedes the cognitive clarity, or the cognitive clarity generates the feeling, rather the feeling and cognitive certainty are always simultaneous. I have never had an epiphany cognitive gestalt image of ordered information, without the feeling of astonishment to go with it.

?

I also suggest this necessarily means that epiphany reveals that subjective and objective are inseparable, but subjective is the senior partner in that dualism (for as long as you remain in a physical body and make use of a physical brain). The epiphany is an inner subjective experience in immaterial consciousness, but the information revealed describes objective external physical reality with uncanny, astonishing, epistemological accuracy, objective truth value, and sometimes natural a-priori axiom quality truth value.

?

“But when I looked for the ultimate reasons for mechanism, and even for the laws of motion, I was greatly surprised to see that they could not be found in mathematics but that I should have to return to metaphysics…that the source of mechanics is metaphysics.” Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz[2] (G III 606)

?

A human being is a whole person, and all knowing always involves integration of thoughts, feelings, and senses. All bestowal of meaning upon information always involves integration of thoughts, feelings, and senses.

[1] Elian Dockrerman “The King of the World”, Time Magazine, February27/March6, 2023

[2] Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (G III 606), Die philosophischen Schriften, 7 vols. Edited by C. I. Gerhardt. Berlin, 1875–90, quoted in, “Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz” by Brandon C. Look, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Section 4.1, Spring 2020 Edition, Edward N. Zalta (ed.)

?