This essay is taken from my book (pictures added). These primary traits have been a recurring presence in my mind of late so I began a new Post, which became unnecessary when looking back at this piece.
In the essay above on Looking Good, I stated that I think that all of the most basic traits of consciousness flow through every level of awareness. Thus, my curiosity wonders which of these were present before the Big Bang and which might have developed later. So it is again time for more “creations of imagination”. [I’m going to ignore the idea of a multiverse, since if that possibility is mentioned in mystical writings, it’s not discernible to me in any that I am familiar with.] In that vein I’ll repeat what I suggested in Creation and Appreciation: “For any choice to occur there must have been, at a very minimum, the options of creating or not creating. Options require distinctions between one “thing” and another, so the possibility of making distinctions must have existed before that initial choice.” For distinctions to be possible, observation must also have been an aspect of consciousness.
If, to borrow a phrase, we were “made in the image and likeness of God,” then it makes sense that we still reflect the “likeness” of our parent energy, which some call god. It also makes sense, from a purely evolutionary point of view, that the essence of what we evolved from would still be embedded in us, much like the DNA in our bodies. And where those likenesses are most visible in a relatively undiluted form is in young children. Initially it takes time to bring their attention into our perceptual ranges, but as they do they are insatiably curious. They observe, then explore and enjoy.
They investigate and try things out long before they have the use of language. Their behavior exhibits a pure “what is this?” – the true beginners mind – and “what can I do with it?” There is typically some level of delight or fear in discovery. I take that delight to be a form of appreciation, as are love, enjoyment, humor, laughter, and the like. I’m not sure about fear. It could be that Being itself perceived the possibility of non-existence when it imagined what was possible. Certainly, each of us are taken aback when a threat to our current experiential existence occurs. But from Being’s perspective, that would be just losing one localized focus of attention so only one certain focal range might truly be “lost”. It would not be much different than one bacterium dying on this planet, insignificant. Regardless, it seems that fear and a survival mechanism comes along with the distinctness generated by having an aspect of Being’s attention focused in one place. I do not see it as a primary attribute, as I struggle to imagine the end of consciousness itself.
Along with observation and distinctions, it appears to me that imagination must have been an original attribute too. In order to choose, there had to be something TO choose. In children and in adults, imagination clearly comes before a creative choice. Something “comes to mind” from somewhere. What’s possible for the child comes after the child has a certain level of familiarity with this physical terrain. At the early stages, they are so new to this place that they don’t know enough to discern what might be possible in physicality and what is not. It is conceivable that this was the case in the beginning of our universe too. Who knows? It seems that possibilities would be few when there was little of anything to play with. Did more stuff to play with allow imagination itself to grow and evolve? It seems almost inevitable that “what’s possible” expanded as the universe had more material to create from, so curiosity and imagination’s playground is expanding all of the “time”. And, of course, the more that exists the more there is to delight in and to appreciate.
As my mind currently sees it, observation, curiosity, imagination, creativity (choice), and delight (appreciation) can present themselves with little distortion through the many layers of consciousness into our current levels of experience. What impedes them to some degree may be the blunting of our current conscious intent from what we have imagined our lives could be, compared to how we experience it to be. Bumping up against the limitations of manifesting our imagined life impedes Becoming’s localized intent (our choices) within our experiential neighborhood. This energetic disruption is experienced and named, which generates a language anchor – like “this sucks” – familiarity and habit. Like every declaration, the mind just says OK and we’ve created that reality. I think that puzzlement, impatience, denial, disappointment, irritation, frustration, resignation, hopelessness, despair, cynicism, jealously, hate, and similar “negative” emotions are, to some degree, a result of an experience of energetic dissonance as our choices, on any level, are impeded. All of these are the result of choices, and are thus not primary attributes but traits derived from assessing the result of choices.
As I’ve pointed to before, longer wavelengths tend to be experienced as relatively quieter, which is reflected in both my body and mind. But this is from the point of view of the observer. The energy of the observer tends to be separate, quiet, and could be described as dispassionate. It is a stepping back out of both choosing and appreciating (defining appreciation as something to value rather than simple assessment). It is one space within which distinctions are revealed, and here I’m pointing to the Observer’s distinctness as an original trait.
Now I will point out that the trait of observation occurs at every energetic level, but I do think that there is a distinct energy lurking behind the observer, at a different temporal rate. It feels different. It is the articulator, the interpreter, or distinguisher, of what was simply observed. With the exception of the Witness state, all of my experiences of observation are not completely still, they are just relatively still. Thus, some aspect of me assesses this as a long wavelength, which must have come into existence from an earlier choice so carries with it a preference. That preference will at least influence the description that follows observation. Without assessment of some kind, it’s hard to imagine making a choice, and so I’m thinking that assessment is a primary attribute too.
I will say here that what I called “First Choice” was, and is, the propeller of intent, the energy of Becoming. It seems logical to me – though this is still, obviously, conjecture – that initially the minute physical/energetic components that started the universe off had very little observable consciousness expressed in their physical form, as far as we can discern. The more complex differentiation that occurred, the more consciousness arose in matter – as Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and others have said. Thus, as localized agents became more and more cognizant of their environment, the more it would become apparent to us that their preferences were being deliberately and consciously chosen.From my current perspective, the energy of Becoming is derived from choice, exists everywhere and is clearly primary. It seems to me that the energy of choice/intent is ever-present through all stages, regardless of what may be discernable to us.
Another experience that would exist at the beginning, and thus manifests here, is that of being solitary. If there was a single conscious awareness before the Big Bang, then the experience of being alone is certainly one of our most fundamental traits. So it is no wonder that we have the experience of being separate. Within the manifested “We” there is the option of what I’ve pointed to as the alternating “I/We”, experiencing itself as alone or connected. But ultimately the solitary is permanent and the “We” is transitory. “I” is a habit because there is only ONE, and it’s a very, very old habit so that family trait isn’t going anywhere. You may wallow in the pleasures of the “We” for periods of time, but at some point, you will come back to the One, the solitary One. That, however, may be at the end of time so go out and play with all of the other “We’s” and enjoy it.
For a look at family traits that are closer to home, I’ll take a look at ones that are more obvious in our day to day experiences. I have two children who had very different ways of being. When still just crawling, my daughter would go over to the crib, sit down next to one of the legs, close her eyes, lean on it, and suck her thumb until we put her in. My son needed to be dead asleep before being put in the crib because if he woke up while in it, he’d howl to get out. We may come in as blank slates from a physical experience standpoint, but we bring an energy all our own into this place. In my model, this is derived from billions of years of intent bringing a focal point to one particular temporal and energetic locale, which for us obviously includes this planet’s energy and its star. The choices we make here clearly generate distinct directions of flow but we always have energetic home bases – on many deeper levels – from which we arose. So our choices here, and our reactions to the choices of others, do tend to favor our underlying proclivities. I was a solitary, quiet observer as a child, and that gravity still tends to tug on me when I’m not engaged in some particular activity. It is where I look out from when at ease. This means that I’m more inclined to observation than to create, participate, seek pleasure, delight, or appreciate. It’s not that I don’t have access to them, and all sorts of “moods”, but it feels like they are spaces that I visit rather than live from. I have a cousin who sees humor in just about everything and the way that he expresses himself is typically hilarious. It’s a reflection of where he comes from. I tend to “run home” to quiet. I think that how each of us expresses ourselves comes most often from whatever set of intentions (choices) brought us here in the first place. Though we likely don’t know what they are, we follow those upstream tunes. It makes sense to me that if I had a specific reason for being here, my trajectory would reflect that once I was here. The fact that I may not be conscious of those choices does not alter their energetic flavor and direction. I’d noted in “Creation and Appreciation” that focused attention generated a flow, which continued on even after I was no longer inputting any conscious energy into it. The gravity of that flow has a slipstream that tends to pull me along after it and the intent that brought me here is doing the same.
I will note here my appreciation of the many authors who have written on Truth, Beauty and Goodness. The insights are extremely valuable as they create distinctions that reveal habitual patterns, and thus earlier choices. I’m not clear about the existence of any of these prior to the Big Bang. 
You could say that the Hindu’s “I am” could be “true”. You could say that Beauty might have been an image of possibility in Being’s imagination, in its purpose to create experienceable beauty. But for beauty to exist there would have to be something to assess. In a singularity, how could that be? Goodness seems to be pretty much out of the question, as it is clearly relational and there was nothing with which to make a comparison.
In sum, there may not be all that many attributes that are directly derived from the beginning. I’m guessing that the primary ones are solitude, observation (consciousness), curiosity (inquiry), assessment (making distinctions), imagination, and choice (active participation). They are fundamental to who we are and seem to be required in order to create, and for that reason are irrevocably interlaced. But of even these, how could any exist without duality? There must be something to observe, there must be something to assess, to be curious about, to imagine, and to choose from. Some distinctions are necessary for all of these. Beauty, appreciation, love, and the like also require duality, but it seems to me that they require some other degree of separation. Some other, or other thing, must exist in order to be assessed as beautiful, to be appreciated or loved, and so would show up immediately after the initial creative act. They will certainly seem like primary attributes, given how close they are to “the beginning” so they are, in a different way, fundamental traits. Regardless, I think that being familiar with all of them, in all of their subtle variations, makes it easier for me to discern the direction in which my ancestral choices are steering me and thus allows me to participate in this life with greater clarity and alignment with those choices. I can actively choose to “ride the horse in the direction that it is going,” as Werner Erhard once said, which is to engage with them all consciously as I come upon them within their myriad expressions.