I’ve long been clear that since all frequencies are moving – and my experience outside of that flux is extremely rare – whatever is experienced as “I” in a given moment is, in some way, also moving. But everything that comes out of my mouth is coming from a perspective – a particular flow – and “I” am clearly not any one perspective. Yet any given perspective often feels to be a result of other perspectives coming together in some kind of revealed frequency. At first I thought that the disparate frequencies merged into a concentrated form that blinded “me” to their former experiential distinctness but it seems that it’s a bit more complex than that. The more I observed the process the more it seemed as if there is a given moment in which a transformation occurs. It appeared that the perspectives were vying for the attention of an observer, that was allowing each to have their say, and at some point the observer enters the space and the noise is quelled by its presence. There then is a separate and distinct place from which a description arises adjacent to that relative silence, like a commentator at a sporting event, and that description defines the boarders of a new distinction.
Experientially, the many perspectives were converted from distinct particles (many transiting perspectives) to one very long wavelength (a singular perception) and was then articulated by an “I”, which I always and only describe as “me”. So it appears that there is a process from experiencing a collection of perspectives, to an observer and an assessor, which in a way declares the resulting point of view. Yet again, where focused attention lies is what determines how I experience myself at any given moment.
Our borders are fuzzy, amorphous collections of perspective spaces that we have access to. They are the loitering, mingling options of the possible. Each of us taps into collections of with different pairings and, being distinct sensors, observers and translators of energetic experience, we all have a different way of experiencing and expressing any resulting singular “perspective” into language. Some space of relative quiet observes, and what is observed is assessed from some other distinct space, which then transmutes the perspectives – some collected “We” – into something new in the process. In a way, this distinguishing itself is a creative act that occurs as a new perspective comes into “my” consciousness. In the next moment, this newly enhanced “I” may choose to share it but I certainly begin to explore and collect experiences from the new vantage point, and the process repeats. It seems to create here, in language, what is imagined there and thus some step in evolution has occurred. The localized “I” is now infused with the frequencies of that larger “We-space” and is able to remain semi-merged with “them”. That new “I” is now flavored by that collective, that particular “We”.
I am thinking that this “I/We” vacillates, like a frequency, from choosing as an I to perceiving as a We (agency to communion and back). So, like frequencies, I have no fixed identity, only flow. Every additional perspective that the “I” includes from the “We-field” enhances the evolving “I” to more fully express the collected intent down through all of the layers of vibration leading to this “place”.
I’m going to jump for a moment here to talking about Holons. Every Holon is composed of organized parts, which make up a whole, and are embedded within other Holons as a part. Each is complete in itself, part of something larger and composed of something smaller. A common example used is that atoms are whole but part of molecules, molecules are whole but part of cells, cells are whole but parts of organisms, etc. And the more complex the Holon is (the more “smaller” Holons which it contains), the more consciousness it has (organisms contain more consciousness than cells).
This is typically used to describe physical reality but I think that, though more fluid, it is mirrored in the energy fields as well. With the use of the now popular term “We space” it is assumed that each of us is an individual that is part of a larger “We” and it is inferred that the “We space” that we are intending to touch is more conscious than we are. It may not yet be physically represented here, like a cell is, but from a larger context we are participating in a level of consciousness that is as much social as physical and that social Holon IS represented here, in that our perspectives are influenced by our personal and cultural “frequency neighborhood”, which in turn we are contributing to by our focused intent. What I am pointing to is that each energetic “Holon” vibrates at a different rate, or frequency. And each whole also vibrates within a range of frequencies, or what I’ve called a frequency neighborhood.
To extend the frequency and Holon metaphor downstream, each of us has skin cells dying every day. We are not consciously aware of them or their “lives”. Yet they have a level of consciousness in the Holon model. And upstream we are unaware of the planet as a whole, the star, which we are orbiting, the frequency of the galaxy’s rotation etc. Our frequency range is much narrower but as self-aware energetic entities, we should have access to other levels, and thus their perspectives, because in its totality, all Holons are intertwined in one massive unified whole/Holon.
What I am proposing is that the experience of being a whole or a part is simply a matter of experiential focus and momentary expression. A Holon is not a whole or a part, it is always a whole and a part. I am immersed in a particular frequency field (some We flow) with the articulation of “what it has to say” following afterwards. I speak that into existence in a way that suits the denser frequency ranges that I would call my norm, and by doing so expand “my” environment to holistically include the new. From this expanded range, the new “I” – the larger energetic Holon – reaches out to explore.
But I want to point out here that every newly enhance I will be experienced no differently than before the enhancement. Though expanded, you will always and only feel like you, an individuated “I”. I will also note that this particular “I” may be, in its entirely, one perspective of some larger We that is collecting “me” as part of its articulation. In a given moment of declaration this “I”, in a mutual act, may be merged with that I and this I may not be aware of it.
In sum, when I focus my attention on the act of choosing, the flow of some energetic “We” is compressed through this faucet named Justin and in passing through in a condensed form, it IS Justin. In the creative choice – the articulation – that opens up a deeper pathway between frequency ranges, I am a singular “I”. But the fodder for that creation is gathered from a collected “We” – a field of perspectives – of which I am, in a way, a component. Upon active choosing, the “We” momentarily disappear and I am.
Cool images. I mostly followed the holon analogy.