Something From Consciousness

Existence is a safe. That safe has a code and the code opens the safe permitting you access to what is inside the safe. Everything is inside the safe. There is no outside the safe, so obviously needing a code to access contents inside the safe is metaphorical not actually physical.

?

You are necessarily part of existence. You must be inside existence, or you could not know that you know. If you were outside existence (impossible) there would be no knower and nothing to know, in fact outside existence is nothing at all and it is certain the nothing is not something. However, since you are aware that you are reading these written word symbol abstractions, you certainly do know that you know. For instance, you know that you are reading these words. You are certain about that, aren’t you? You should be, otherwise, something is wrong with your knowing. I am certain about that even if you are not. I am also certain that if you look you will grok that you know that you know.

?

Reading these words is ordinary knowing, for example what you know = the contents of your knowledge, for instance you know the word symbol abstractions and you bestow specific meaning upon them. It is simultaneously meta-knowing, which is knowing that you know (whatever the contents of your knowledge happen to be), you not only know the words, but you also know that you know the words.

?

A fundamental question naturally occurs to me, and I assume once I point it out, it will seem to you to be a sensible, important, even fundamental question for you to ask yourself. That question is “Who or what knows that it knows?” That is in my opinion just about the single most important question you could ask “yourself”.

?

Your first answer to that question might be something like, “I know myself.” So, who or what is “I” and who or what is “myself”? Which is the subject to consciousness, and which is the object of consciousness? Furthermore, what is consciousness itself? It is a necessary dualism that the subject to consciousness, consciousness itself and objects of consciousness are three distinct categories, for instance a superposition like [alive/0/dead] is two distinct logically contradictory objects in one wholeness object, a single superposition. I and myself and consciousness can’t be identical though they could refer to one holon unity of wholeness. Holon means wholes exist inside wholes; in other words, some parts are also wholes intrinsically.

?

Wholeness is as fundamental as elementary. An elementary object, say a quantum electron, is fundamental because it has no constituent parts, it is not made from something else. Wholeness is fundamental not because it has no constituent parts, rather because it is complete, and it is necessarily true that wholeness is not a simple sum of parts. A human being is alive and whole and complete, and if you try to disassemble a human being you destroy the human being. That tells you wholeness is not a simple sum of parts. If wholeness was a simple sum of parts, we would see cadavers moving about just like living human beings. We would also see Frankenstein(s) walking among us.

?

So, there are two kinds of fundamental: 1) quantum elementary and 2) macro-scale wholeness (complex objects that are complete).

?

Let’s return to “I know myself” which is a statement of tautological truth, like saying X = X. Tautology means any object is exactly, only and always itself, without exception. However, tautology does not give us much information, almost none, about what X is. To fully describe something, for instance we (each immaterial ego consciousness) give it (= bestow meaning) a name, and a set of identity conditions, say properties, functions and relations (interactions with other objects). But who or what is doing all that abstraction naming, defining, explaining, measuring, calculating, quantizing, recording, etc.?

?

Someone, some live sentient conscious human being is doing all the abstractions. Only human ego consciousness does abstractions. No physical quantum elementary particles do abstraction. I define a mind as a physical body/brain/central nervous system docked to a private instance of ego consciousness.

?

In my cosmology (my abstraction story or our whole physical universe = the safe existence), when I crack the metaphysical code to that safe, when I discover the code that permits me to access inside existence, that permits me to know that I know what is inside existence, literally what is inside myself, I realize = see = know = understand = grok, that ego consciousness drives the human bus. Ego consciousness commands physical. Physical does not command consciousness, though physical certainly does place limits upon what consciousness can and cannot do.

?

We certainly do know that a driver of a bus cannot drive if there is no bus to drive, and a bus without a driver does not go anywhere. Like, what use is a billboard in a desert if there is no one to see it. In fact, human beings are buses (another metaphor). Without a driver a human being is just a cadaver, just a heap of parts, not any complete, whole, live being. If a person is declared brain dead, but the body remains alive, say attached to a ventilator machine, that literally means, no one is home inside, the driver has left the bus. The immaterial ego consciousness driver has left the physical bus. We have self-driving buses, but surely you know that something is driving that bus. A computer is driving that bus. Artificial intelligence is driving that bus. So, a driverless bus is not a bus without a driver, rather it is a bus with a driver that is a computer AI.

?

We also surely know that the computer AI that drives the bus was created by a human ego consciousness. No physical object can create itself. Every physical object must be caused to begin to exist, so if you go back to the beginning, it is obvious that something must exist without beginning to cause the first physical thing in the first universe, and that something is necessarily immaterial not physical, otherwise something physical would have to already exist to create something else that is physical. That immaterial thing that exists without beginning is eternal = Aseity = God. If you do not follow the question, “What existed before that?” all the way back to before the first physical thing, you flail about helplessly in a whirlpool of infinite regress which is fatal logical contradiction.

?

If the bus is a human being, then something is driving that bus. We certainly do know that a human being is not an arm, not a leg, not a heart, not a lung, not even a brain. It would be more accurate to say not only, for instance a human being is not, not an arm; not, not a leg; not, not a heart; not, not a lung; not, not a brain. Nevertheless, is it obvious that all those parts, and all the parts I did not mention, are not what a human being is, otherwise cadavers would be walking about and so would Frankenstein(s). In fact, a human being without a private ego consciousness docked to it, is not alive, it is just a heap of parts. We can safely infer that consciousness is not just something physical is doing, that consciousness is not emergent from a physical brain, rather that consciousness docks to a physical brain and makes use of it, just like a consciousness makes use of a computer or an AI system.

?

If a human being is a physical bus, something must drive that physical bus. If a human being is a physical brain, something must operate that physical brain. Sentient intentional consciousness commands the physical bus, not only the physical human being but also everything else physical that is extrinsic to a human being. Sentient intentional immaterial ego consciousness commands the physical body/brain/central nervous system live organism. And that ego consciousness not only knows, it also knows that it knows.

?

So, we must answer the question what the simple statement of tautology “I am myself” means. That which is in command of the whole self, is driver of the human bus. Human ego consciousness is in command of the rest of the human physical organism. Ego consciousness is the high self of all the little selves that make a whole complex complete human being.

?

Therefore, to answer the fundamental question of “Who am I” you must look for and find that which is looking. Where do you look? Inside yourself, of course.

?

What equipment do you need to be able to look? You do not need a microscope or a physics laboratory. You certainly do not need a computer or any other machine, including AI. Nor do you look with your physical eyes (because what you are looking for is immaterial invisible), and you do not look with your arms, legs, or heart. In fact, you do not even look with your brain (which is just a very complex physical computer), rather, you look with ego consciousness and your ego consciousness makes good use of the physical body/brain/central nervous system in the search for the real meta-self, the self of selves, the commander of all the parts of one whole human being.

?

Whose permission do you need to begin the search? No one. You simply choose with intention to begin the search, to begin your spiritual odyssey.

?

Who do you need to teach you how to look? No one. You ultimately invent your own method of searching. You do have permission; it is spiritually lawful to review the reports of spiritual finders (those among us who have already found what they were looking for). You can follow the path they have marked, but at some point, you will find it leads to a dead end, for you. You must go the final distance alone with nothing but your naked physical, with heart wide open, with childhood innocence intact, and with ego consciousness in a state of spiritual surrender, to return HOME. Everyone returns to the same HOME, but everyone gets there by a unique path, like everyone gets to the same top of a mountain regardless of which route they have climbed.

?

To find yourself, to find HOME requires that you look for and find that which is looking. You use consciousness to observe consciousness as an object of consciousness. When you find what you are looking for you come face to face with your true self. You also, simultaneously have a close encounter of the ultimately simple kind, you come face to face with your maker. That experience feels like but does not actually mean identity. It does not mean you have created yourself, or that you are God. The illumination of enlightenment goes so bright you see = know = understand = grok I AM THAT! which feels like identity with everything all the way to eternal. That is an experience of God consciousness. Before the enlightenment God consciousness was ineffable. After the enlightenment God consciousness remains ineffable! There is no solution to the mystery of life, only a revelation of its simple divine nature.

?

My brain is a physical epiphany processing machine. It is my immaterial ego consciousness that makes use of the physical brain to bestow meaning upon the gestalt images densely encoded with information that ego consciousness presents to the brain for consideration, like picking up one book rather another to read. Daily epiphanies, as compared with life-changing profound occasional epiphanies, begin with a simple tug, a word, a phrase, a thought, a feeling, a gestalt image occurs in my conscious awareness. It just pops into my awareness, not a result of any thinking process. If I do not just ignore the tug, but rather sit down with notepad and pen, and start writing, whole sentences, paragraphs, pages, etc. just pour out in a natural flood of organized information. Virtually all my writing begins with exactly that tiny little tug inside immaterial consciousness and inside the physical epiphany processing (information decoding) brain.

?

This post is an example of what I am describing. This post is an actual description of a real path from immaterial to physical, which every human being has experienced, and could cultivate if they make the spiritual effort to learn how to do it reliably, rather than as just an occasional or rare occurrence. This is not something from nothing, rather it is something from consciousness.