I’ll start with my very basic framework upon which everything else is supported. This has evolved over time, and simply represents where I look out at life from at this moment in time. Though it’s far from a perfect metaphor, I’ll use the term “river of consciousness”, since I do perceive relatively directional flow and a river is something everyone can relate to. But this is a simplification, so just a place to start the metaphor building.
The Hindus say that the only true statement in the universe is “I am”. The premise, typical of monotheistic religions, is that in the beginning there was just the Word/God/Being/Consciousness/Self (fill in your favorite label) or the like; whole, solitary and self aware.
If we accept the premise that “in the beginning” there was conscious awareness, which I will, I would think that the initial creative act that set the physical universe into motion must have been initiated with intent, choice, or at least its energetic equivalent. Andrew Cohen refers to this as the “Evolutionary Impulse” and others “first cause”. I prefer “First Choice” since that more clearly indicates a deliberate action rather than some spontaneous event.
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. It also makes sense to me that both the imagination of what could be and the curiosity of what would manifest would likely have been present as core attributes.
What was there to distinguish before the physical universe was created? I can’t imagine; “let there be light! ”.
Only after first choice could there then be a distinction made between that which originated it all and the manifesting force driving diversification. That is not to say these two components were separate, only that there were now distinguishable traits; one “moving” and one the source from which it was emanating.
Using terms proffered by others, one is pure consciousness, “ground of Being” or just Being; that which existed prior to any second, before the Big Bang and the manifest universe. The other is what Andrew Cohen calls the Evolutionary Impulse or “Becoming”; that energy which is driving diversification/evolution. I will use the terms Being and Becoming, as Cohen did,…..because I like them.
“Becoming” surely has as it’s primary trait that from which it was generated. Not just consciousness itself but also the nature to imagine, to be curious, to distinguish and creatively choose. So in this model I’m saying that the impulse to make distinctions, and then choose, is at the forefront of each and every act of creative diversification, then and now.
I’ll here provide a few quotes from Steve McIntosh’s wonderful book “Evolution’s Purpose”. Not only because he so brilliantly conveys evolution’s nature and process, but also because it made sense of the mechanisms that I was seeing.
“…..I cannot see how the first cause could be anything less than personal, since we are personal. Indeed, how could the part be greater than the whole?”
“What does a universe of existential perfection do for an encore? It transcends itself through the development of creatures who can experience becoming perfect in time. That is, to achieve evolutionary perfection freely by choice, by effort, and even occasionally struggle, is to create an aspect of reality that did not exist in the state of existential perfection that we recognize as prevailing in the universe prior to the Big Bang.”
“Evolution is drawn toward perfection through the choices of consciousness….”
And I’ll add one here one by the Irish poet John O’Donohue
“…the ultimate passion of the Cosmos is the creativity of divine beauty”.
To me, they are saying that manifesting experienceable perfection is at the center of Being’s choice to create the universe and thus is Becoming’s active intent.
Distinguishing and choosing, in some energetic fashion, down the eons has manifested untold trillions of pathways, spreading and diverging in all directions, with each component of awareness producing a myriad of points of physicality and the extended perceptual and experiencing capacity, though perhaps muted, of its origin, Being.
Each point observes the environs of its locale and, in some way, selects new paths moment by moment; continuing that “downstream” current sourced by its headwaters, Being’s initial intent. Long forgotten in its focus on the immediate is any awareness of all of the upstream perspectives that it has traversed. The momentum of the energetic flow carries it along.
The choice of the next most perfect possible creation, in any particular place, for any particular aspect of the physical universe, must depend upon a particular perspective or set of perspectives in that particular locale.
I’ll use a worldwide company, like Siemens, as an example. A service technician knows what specific miscellaneous parts and what tools he needs to work on a particular piece of equipment, and likely his supervisor does too. The technician may prefer a certain specific tool, but his supervisor will factor in the costs, his budget, his perspective of the need, and perhaps it’s long term cost benefit ratio. The local salesman of the equipment will likely know little or nothing about a tech’s tools, or the minute details of the equipment’s set up or repair; a sales manager will know even less. Going upstream, the general manager of that branch office knows less than the sales manager, a regional manager knows even less and the CEO, unless you’re a real curious guy like Elon Musk, will know virtually nothing about the minutia that helps a technician do his job better. Each in his own arena knows what’s needed for the best performance, based on the view from his level. The CEO is feeding his intentions downstream but it is primarily the folks in each area that determine what’s needed to improve things [make them more perfect] at that level. Yet it is all being driven by the intent of the CEO whose broad perspective is, in turn, not perceptible to our technician.
So though the overall intent/choice energy stream is fed from Being, in the form and flow of Becoming, the choices of what will make one’s current environment more perfect must, again, be derived individually and locally. We forget the upstream choices in our focus on the immediate choice at hand, like “I’m stopping for groceries”. But those upstream choices are still flowing down to us, as subtle as those experiences may be.
I’m going to stop here for a moment and point to something fundamental about focused attention. By its very nature, when one is focused on any particular thing, everything else has less attention paid to it and often none at all. So focused attention has blindness, of a sort, as one of its traits. So no matter how much any particular “I” may be perceiving, it is blind to nearly everything that it is not paying attention to at a given moment.
So if you can fathom all of the creative intent generated in the Big Bang, spreading out over about 13.8 billion years in all directions with all sorts of intertwining on micro and macro levels, it’s easy to see that the most distant “upstream” choices are those to which we are most blind. They are still sense-able, since their upstream flow is feeding us, but they are so subtle that they reside deep in the relative stillness that lies within us (very, very long wavelengths).
Now on the one hand, we have the downstream flow of Becoming’s energy, infusing every individuated perspective with creative intent searching for perfection. And it accesses those perspectives from every angle that it can because that is most effective for the larger purposes that are feeding the stream. On the other hand, we have individuated entities’ perspectives (points of Becoming’s attention) making choices about what is most perfect for them. There will be subtle preferences flowing from upstream but it seems these are mostly – though not entirely – overridden by the immediate downstream consciousness since that’s the place where perfection is being assessed and choices on perfection made. For choice to impact a particular frequency range, it must be focused to vibrate within that that frequency range.
So Becoming will access all possible perspectives through each portal available. Each perspective, or portal, will generate its own observations and creative choices along the way. Though each “I” moves among a multitude of perspectives, it will generally be making its choices in the particular range of frequencies to which it is most attuned.
What is also true, in my experience, is that focused attention generates an energetic flow in the direction of my intent and this current has attributes. Firstly, it changes intensity based on the level and duration of attention exerted. Becoming a lawyer, for example, takes longer and more intense attention than mowing the lawn. Thus the higher intensity generates a broader and more significant flow.
Secondly, the generated flow does not end when my attention leaves it. It keeps flowing off into the surrounding energetic field on its original trajectory. Some flows are easy to detach from and others are not. For instance, most people have had the experience of eating at a restaurant and realizing they have had enough to eat before their plate is empty. They may even stop eating but will occasionally start picking at what’s left until all, or most, is gone. The energetic flow of eating lingers on a bit and you must choose to stop, or not.
That one is relatively easy to detach from compared, for instance, to missing an Olympic team you’ve trained years for. The presence of that flow will last a while.
So each generated flow has gravity of its own and the more energy that I’ve put into it, the more that energetic wake will pull me in as it seemingly meanders off into the nearby energetic environment. That gravity, I think, may be what manifests in the world as its survival mechanism. Those energies also tend to give this fluid identity relative stability. Those that I give repeated attention to, more so.
One thing that is clearly true about Beauty is that our experience of it comes in the form of appreciation. It can “take our breath away” so to speak. It takes us to a longer wavelength where peacefulness/relative stillness reigns.
But in order to appreciate one must stop and look and that is certainly not the nature of Becoming. Becoming is “urgent” and intentional. Though I can’t really determine where in my experience Becoming’s features end and where Being’s begin – likely because there is no distinct transition point, just a directional shift in flow – using my interpretation of Cohen’s model I’m going to posit that, in general, one primary attribute of Becoming is that it choses/creates and for Being, it appreciates.
In my view we are smaller versions of the initial generative flow that started the on/off; up/down movement; movement/stillness of all waveforms “in the beginning”. We are microcosms of that waveform, also moving up and moving down (metaphorically). Now every waveform has a high point and a low point, movement between the two and a minute pause at transition. It seems to me that each direction reflects a quality of Becoming and Being, with choice driving in one direction (downstream) and appreciation in the other (upstream). Becoming creates (fills up) and Being appreciates (empties out). So we are both driven to create (choose) beauty, then experience and appreciate that creation (complete it).
We, in our every day lives, create and appreciate all of the time and on many levels (from a moment enjoying fine chocolate to changing careers). It is easy to see that any individual “I” can get lost, not only in the movement of any one waveform but in the multiplicity of waveforms that are perceivable even within the general frequency ranges that we normally hang out in. Becoming is in relentless pursuit of beauty and, when done with one task, leaves what was created in its wake as it scours experience for the new and more beautiful. To me it appears to do so in order that Being can appreciate and revel in the created. Without the created, there is nothing to appreciate; without appreciation, there is no reason to create.
In sum, I think that each “I” is the end point of a very long series of choices, made within the maelstrom of choices by “others” down through “time”. So in a way, each “I” has the opportunity to create what it sees as the next most beautiful expression of its perceived environment. It also is inherently designed to appreciate the beauty of what it and others have created. It also seems to me that, like waves on a beach, the individual and collective energetic transitions of flow (creating to appreciating or vice versa) generate some inter-flow interference that may be experienced as dissonance and resisted. So not only might we experience this directional dissonance, but the choices of other beings also buffet our energetic fields. From some broader perspectives it may all appear Beautiful. From our more localized assessment, less so.
“I arise in the morning torn between a desire to improve the world and a desire to enjoy the world. This makes it hard to plan the day” – E.B. White