·
‘Ontology’ is a
Western philosophical term that is usually understood as having to do with the
realm of ‘being’ or ‘is-ness’ as such (‘Being’) in contrast to
the realm of specific ‘beings’ of any sort.
·
Being as such has three
primary ontological dimensions, distinct but inseparable. These include not
only what is called ‘Being’, but also what is called ‘Non-Being’ and what
can be called ‘Coming to Be’ – ‘Be-coming’ or ‘Be-ING’.
·
The Awareness Principle understands the three primary ‘ontological’
realms, i.e. Non-Being, Being, and Coming to Be (‘Be-ing’ or ‘Be-coming’) as primordial
realms of Awareness as such:
·
1. AWARENESS OF NON-BEING
Awareness, not of Nothingness but of all that is still latent or potential in Awareness. As such it is made up of potentialities of awareness. These potentialities of awareness have in turn the nature of ‘potential’ beings, i.e. individualised consciousnesses
Awareness, not of Nothingness but of all that is still latent or potential in Awareness. As such it is made up of potentialities of awareness. These potentialities of awareness have in turn the nature of ‘potential’ beings, i.e. individualised consciousnesses
· 2. AWARENESS OF BEING
This is the realm of all actual beings, worlds and events, all of which are co-present in the Universal Awareness Field – understood as a singular time-space of awareness which embraces not only past, present and future actualities but alternate and parallel ones.
This is the realm of all actual beings, worlds and events, all of which are co-present in the Universal Awareness Field – understood as a singular time-space of awareness which embraces not only past, present and future actualities but alternate and parallel ones.
· 3.BE-ING/BE-COMING/COMING-TO-BE
This is the innate power of actualisation of all potential beings, events and realities and events – past, present, future and ‘parallel’ - which are not only co-present but constantly co-presencing or ‘coming to be’ in the Universal Awareness Field and its all-embracing time-space of awareness.
Being as Be-ing
The Realms of Possibility and Parallelity
The Seventh Realm –
Plurality
From Metaphysics to Physics
This is the innate power of actualisation of all potential beings, events and realities and events – past, present, future and ‘parallel’ - which are not only co-present but constantly co-presencing or ‘coming to be’ in the Universal Awareness Field and its all-embracing time-space of awareness.
Being as Be-ing
The unity of all three realms lies not only in the fact that they are fundamentally
realms of awareness but their essence lies in the third realm in particular. For though I have termed this the realm
of ‘Becoming’, philosophy has traditionally opposed the concept of ‘Being’ -
understood as static, unchanging presence - with that of ‘Becoming’, understood
as constant flux or change.
Yet what if the essence of both Being and Becoming is neither the simple, unchanging presence of things in awareness, nor their constant change, but rather their continuous presencing - their ‘Be-ing’?
What if, indeed, there ‘is’ no-thing ‘out there’ or ‘in here’ that is simply present, waiting to be perceived?
What if, instead of there simply ‘being’ things of any sort that we then happen to be aware of , there is ultimately nothing but awareness as such - constantly and continuously thinging itself?
No trees, branches, leaves, flowers or fruit but a constant treeing, branching, leafing, flowering and fruiting. No everyday objects like tables and chairs but the constant and sustained tabling and chairing of each table or chair.
What if there is no matter but a constant mattering or ‘materialising’ of awareness – not my awareness or yours but the One, universal or Ultimate Awareness?
What if not only things but their sensory qualities are not simply present, but constantly and continuously presencing?
What if we were able to experience a colour such as orange, for example, as a constant orange-ing, a shape such as roundness as a constant round-ing, and a material texture such as wood as a constant wood-ing?
Yet what if the essence of both Being and Becoming is neither the simple, unchanging presence of things in awareness, nor their constant change, but rather their continuous presencing - their ‘Be-ing’?
What if, indeed, there ‘is’ no-thing ‘out there’ or ‘in here’ that is simply present, waiting to be perceived?
What if, instead of there simply ‘being’ things of any sort that we then happen to be aware of , there is ultimately nothing but awareness as such - constantly and continuously thinging itself?
No trees, branches, leaves, flowers or fruit but a constant treeing, branching, leafing, flowering and fruiting. No everyday objects like tables and chairs but the constant and sustained tabling and chairing of each table or chair.
What if there is no matter but a constant mattering or ‘materialising’ of awareness – not my awareness or yours but the One, universal or Ultimate Awareness?
What if not only things but their sensory qualities are not simply present, but constantly and continuously presencing?
What if we were able to experience a colour such as orange, for example, as a constant orange-ing, a shape such as roundness as a constant round-ing, and a material texture such as wood as a constant wood-ing?
The understanding of ‘Becoming’ not simply as change or transformation
but as ‘coming-to-be’ or ‘be-coming’ – as ‘Be-ing’, is central. For true wonder at the fact that anything is at all is impossible unless we are
able to directly experience their ‘Being’ or ‘is-ness’ in a wholly new way -
not as some sort of one-off creation out of Nothingness - ex nihilo - that leaves them simply ‘there’, present to our
awareness and either changing or not-changing, but rather as their constant
emergence or presencing from and
within awareness – their Be-ing.
The Being of things understood as simple co-presence in awareness is the essence of space. Understood as their Be-ing on the other hand – their continuous presencing - it is the essence of time. The world around us and everything in it is indeed in this sense, not simply ‘there’ at all.
There is indeed ‘no-thing’ that simply ‘is’ in the sense of being present. Yet the terror of Non-Being or ‘Nothingness’ in this sense – of ‘no-thing-ness’ – can at once be removed by sheer wonder and gratefulness for the constant thinging of things, their Be-ing.
‘Being’ is usually thought of as a state. Rethinking it as ‘Be-ing’ however, Being is not a state but a process. It is ‘no-thing’ and yet neither is it Nothing.
Instead it is a continuous process of creative actualisation or Action. What unites all three realms of awareness therefore is not only Awareness as such and its innate potentials, but also the actualisation or presencing of these potentials.
Awareness of Potentiality and its perpetual presencing or actualisation, are inseparable aspects of the Divine. Thus we do not need to ‘actualise’ our being or ‘self’. For it is constantly being actualised, constantly presencing in awareness. This is the meaning of Being as ‘Be-ing’.
The Being of things understood as simple co-presence in awareness is the essence of space. Understood as their Be-ing on the other hand – their continuous presencing - it is the essence of time. The world around us and everything in it is indeed in this sense, not simply ‘there’ at all.
There is indeed ‘no-thing’ that simply ‘is’ in the sense of being present. Yet the terror of Non-Being or ‘Nothingness’ in this sense – of ‘no-thing-ness’ – can at once be removed by sheer wonder and gratefulness for the constant thinging of things, their Be-ing.
‘Being’ is usually thought of as a state. Rethinking it as ‘Be-ing’ however, Being is not a state but a process. It is ‘no-thing’ and yet neither is it Nothing.
Instead it is a continuous process of creative actualisation or Action. What unites all three realms of awareness therefore is not only Awareness as such and its innate potentials, but also the actualisation or presencing of these potentials.
Awareness of Potentiality and its perpetual presencing or actualisation, are inseparable aspects of the Divine. Thus we do not need to ‘actualise’ our being or ‘self’. For it is constantly being actualised, constantly presencing in awareness. This is the meaning of Being as ‘Be-ing’.
The Realms of Possibility and Parallelity
Just as the same inspiration, source or mood could give rise, in a human
being, to a painting or piece of music, and just as a stem cell can give rise
to a host of specific cell types, so can creative Potentialities always find
more than one possible form of
actualisation. Furthermore however, the realm of Potentiality is itself
constantly being enriched by new
Possibilities. For just as one thought or thing automatically implies or gives
rise to another, so does all creative Action automatically imply and give rise
to multiple further Possibilities of
Action - of actualisation or manifestation. Thus there is also an endless
cyclical or rather spiral relation uniting the 3rd realm (that of
creative Action or Actualisation) with the 1st realm (that of
creative Potentiality) through the 2nd realm (that of all that is
constantly being Actualised). In addition to the triad of the three primary
realms (Potentiality or Non-Being, Actuality or Being, and Actualisation as
‘Be-ing’) we must recognise a fourth – the realm of Possibility. All Action and
Actualities then, emerge not simply from the 1st realm of pure Potentiality
therefore, but from a Realm of Possible actions
and actualities - one that is both latent in the realm of Potentiality and at
the same time constantly being expanded through the very process of Actualisation. Yet the question then arises – what ‘becomes’
of the ‘Alternate’ Possibilities generated
by the process of Actualisation in any given domain or world of Actuality but
not themselves actualised within it?
The answer is that these not only feed back into the 1st realm, that
of pure Potentiality - but also find expression in a realm of Alternate or
Parallel Actualities. This is what I term the realm of Alternity or Parallelity
- recognised in quantum physics through the Parallel Worlds theory of Hugh
Everett.
The result of these considerations is that in addition to the triad of
three primary domains of reality so far considered – those of Potentiality,
Actuality and the process of Actualisation – the action of realisation as such - we must add three further realms: a realm of
constantly multiplying Possibilities of Action without which no free action
or choice would be possible and within
which all actions and choices first occur, a realm of Parallel actualities in
which alternate Possibilities are
chosen and actualised. These are in turn united by a realm of Reciprocal Action
- whereby Possibilities actualised in one world or actuality both spring from
and generate un-Actualised possibilities in another Alternate or Parallel
world. For whilst in any one ‘Actual’ reality the Parallel realities in which
Alternate Possibilities of action are Actualised appear as mere imaginary possibilities - in those Alternate or Parallel realities
themselves, these Possibilities are experienced as fully real – as Actualities. Our every experience and action then,
is not just the Actualisation of a Potentiality within the Actuality of our own
world (the one we take as sole reality) but also the Actualisation - from
within a vast realm of Possible actions - of alternate actions and experiences
within Alternate Actualities or ‘Parallel Worlds’.
This principle applies to the ‘self’ or ‘I’ also. For that self or ‘I’ which does or experiences one thing in
one world or sphere of Actuality is ‘itself’ not the same self or ‘I’ as that which experiences or enacts another Possibility
in a parallel but Alternate Actuality. Together then, with ‘Parallel’ or
‘Alternate’ Actions and Actualities, worlds and universes, go Parallel and
Alternate selves. These multiple selves, actions, possibilities and actualities
are united only by a higher Awareness - one which embraces not only the three
primary realms of Potentiality, Actuality and Action or Actualisation, but also
the three, no less significant realms of Possibility, Alternate or Parallel
Actualities - and their Reciprocity. Pure Awareness alone is the primordial ‘zero-realm’ that embraces all the other
six realms or domains of reality.
1.
The Realm
of Potentiality that is the source of all.
2.
The Realm
of Actuality that we normally identify with 'reality' per se.
3.
The Realm
of Actualisation or Action as
such - of reality as realisation.
4.
The Realm
of Possibility – of multiple possible actions and actualities.
5.
The Realm
of Alternity or Parallelity – of Parallel but Alternate Actualities.
6.
The Realm
of Reciprocity – the reciprocal relation of Actual and Alternate realities.
The Seventh Realm –
Plurality
The realm of Parallelity embraces not just countless alternate or
parallel physical realities, but also
an infinite Plurality of pre-physical
and trans-physical realms, domains,
or ‘planes’ of awareness. In each of these planes (Sanskrit Loka) experiencing takes on a wholly different nature and wholly
different forms to those we are used to in the physical plane – as it does in
the plane of dreaming awareness for example. In all of these trans-physical
realms, the experienced relation
between the six fundamental realms of
awareness is different in one way or another. In the domain of dreaming
awareness for example, as in the first trans-physical plane we enter in the
life-between-lives, Actualities are less fixed and we experience with far more
immediacy that constant process of Actualisation or ‘Be-ing’ whereby different
elements of our experience, inner and outer, are both constantly coming-to-be
or arising and also passing away - as in a dream. The realms of dreaming and of
the after-life are experienced directly as realms of ‘Becoming’ in the
traditional sense – of arising and
passing away. In yet other realms of the life-between lives we have the
opportunity to experience Parallel realities simultaneously, and to explore, in
pseudo-physical form, all the Alternate lives we might have led on earth. The 1st
primary realm of awareness – the realm of Potentiality – is an intensional
‘time-space’ of awareness circumscribing space-time itself, and embracing all
Potential, Possible and all Parallel Actualities – including what we perceive
physically as ‘past’, ‘present’ and ‘future’ existences and Actualities. This
‘time-space’ is not one-dimensional – an experience of one thing following
another in a single line of ‘space-time’. Instead it is an awareness that spans and embraces multiple moments in time and
multiple lifetimes simultaneously. From its perspective, all lifetimes are
simultaneous or co-present, and there is no moment of any of our lives that is
not constantly and eternally being
lived. Moments do not simply constitute a ‘present’ which then disappear into
the Past to be superseded by ‘Future’ moments. Instead all that is experienced as
‘present’ is constantly presencing –
constantly emerging from the realm of Possibility and constantly giving rise to
Alternate ‘past’ and ‘future’ Actualities.
So-called ‘reincarnational’ existences on the physical plane are but one
linear, temporal dimension of the realm of Alternity or Parallelity. This realm
also embraces countless non-physical
as well as physical planes of reality, all of which together constitute the
realm of Plurality - a multi-dimensional universe or multi-verse of awareness,
made up of countless planes of awareness. These are all ‘Parallel’ planes in
the sense that each is defined by one of an infinite number of Alternate
Possible modes of experiencing. Thus what may be perceived as variations of
material ‘mass’, ‘density’ or form on the physical plane may be experienced as
variations of light, of colour or of quasi-musical ‘tone’ of feeling in
different non-physical planes – and vice versa. What is experienced as ‘inner’
on one plane may be experienced as ‘outer’ in another – or as neither inner nor
outer. In general, what is experienced within the ‘higher’ non-physical planes
takes the form of psychical ‘qualia’ – sensed and sensual qualities of
awareness as such. Instead of perceiving ‘space’ as a physical expanse before
our eyes for example, it will be experienced as a spacious field or expansion
of awareness as such. Whereas on the physical plane a feeling of warmth or
coolness towards another person might express itself as physical closeness or
distance to them, on non-physical planes, what we ordinarily experience as
spatial closeness and distance (or as physical warmth or coolness) is
experienced purely as warmth or coolness of feeling.
Phenomena such as light, warmth, colour and sound are experienced on
non-physical planes not as sensory
qualities of objects, but rather as sensual
qualities of awareness – light being experienced as luminous radiance of
awareness itself, and colours and tones as felt colourations or tones of
awareness – comparable to what we sense as tones or colourations of mood.
From Metaphysics to Physics
Physics used to be identified with a mechanistic view of the universe in
which everything consisted of matter in
motion. Quantum physics has effectively made the notion of solid matter
meaningless. For on an ultra-microscopic or quantum level, such ‘things’ as
mass, momentum, energy, space and time, cease to be separately quantifiable or
even definable realities - even ‘particles’ such as electrons turning out to
have the same non-localised wave character
as light. In dispelling ‘the myth of matter’ quantum physics has also made
redundant our common but mythical idea of motion.
When we view objects and people moving on a TV screen we know at the back of
our minds that we are not actually observing ‘matter in motion’ but simply
multiple points of light with different colours or ‘wavelengths’ turning on and
off at different fixed points on the screen – and in doing so forming regular
patterns on that screen which appear like familiar material objects and seem to
be in motion. From a quantum-physical
perspective however, all perceived
motion, even motion in what we perceive as three-dimensional space, has the
same character as motion on a flat two-dimensional screen. Nothing – ‘no-thing’
actually moves ‘in’ space. There is
simply a potential for seeing things at varying points in space. When a ball
has been thrown it is no more than a visual image of motion in space of the
sort created by points of light on a flat screen. Yet as Samuel Avery
convincingly argues, behind our visual image
of the ball in motion lurks a potential tactile
sensation – that of catching and feeling the ball in our hands. It is this
potential for tactile sensation that makes us sense the ball not just as a
visual ‘image’ we can see but as ‘solid’ matter. Similarly, it is because we
are aware that the food we actually see on our TV dinner plate can also potentially be touched and tasted that
we regard it as having more ‘materiality’ than a mere photograph or TV image of
food on a plate. The TV image itself only seems to be ‘real’ – matter like - in
so far as it reminds us of these potential qualities – we can also recall or
imagine the tactile sensation of feeling a ball or the taste sensation of
eating a meal that we see on TV. In Avery’s words: “It is the potential for
tactile sensation that makes a visual image ‘physical’.” And more generally
“The concept of material substance … is derived from potential perceptions in each sensory realm.” [my stress].
In other words, what we think of as ‘matter’ is nothing simply actual but
rather a relation between actual
experiences in one sensory dimension
of experience (for example the visual) and potential
experiences in another (for example the tactile dimension). For not only do all
actual experiences begin as potential experiences – as potential patterns or qualities of
awareness. They also seem all the more ‘actual’
to the extent that, like the experience of seeing a ball coming towards us,
they are accompanied by an awareness of potential
experiences such as moving to catch the ball and feeling it in our hands. Yet even the apparent motion of our own
bodies in catching a ball is not an example of ‘matter’ in motion. There is no
motion of our body ‘in’ space – merely the awareness of subjective sensations of motion, and of different
actions such as catching a ball. The essence of all bodily ‘action’ then, is
not ‘actually’ any sort of objective motion of our bodies in space but rather
the actualisation of potential patterns of sensation. Both
‘matter’ and its ‘motion’ then, are nothing essentially objective but rather an
awareness of potential dimensions and patterns of sensory experiencing within
actual ones. Matter is therefore ‘real’ only in the root sense of the word as
‘mother’ [mater] of all things - being the maternal womb or matrix of
potentiality – more specifically a realm of potential
patterns and qualities of awareness.
These then find experience as actual
patterns and qualities of sensory
experiencing.
The ‘metaphysical’ realm of Potentiality then, can be said to consist of
countless potential field-patterns and
field-qualities of awareness – comparable to the countless potential images
that a flat two-dimensional screen could display. The realm of ‘physical’
Actuality on the other hand, consists of actually patterned fields and qualities of awareness – comparable to all the
images we actually perceive, not just on two-dimensional screens, but as the
overall four-dimensional field of sensory awareness that we experience as the
physical world. The realm of Plurality
is comparable to the countless actual channels or web images available to us
for viewing on a TV or computer screen. The Realm of Alternity or Parellelity
can be compared to all the alternate
TV channels, web-pages and video streams that are constantly and concurrently
running in parallel within the realm of Plurality – ‘unreal’ for those who may
not be aware of them at all, but real for those who are aware of them and for
whom they become actual by viewing them.
The realm of Reciprocity can be compared to the way in which alternate possible TV channels,
programmes and websites not only define themselves by the reciprocal relation
but have a way of multiplying by simultaneously differentiating themselves from
and mimicking one another. Indeed they may even mutually and reciprocally
incorporate one another – as when one webpage or website offers links to
another, one TV channel advertises or shows broadcasts bought from another - or
even displays a broadcast running on
another channel in an internal frame.
Experiential phenomena are recognisably formed patterns or ‘matrices’ of
sensory qualities, like patterned points of light on a screen. Yet the patterns
and sensory qualities that give form to experienced phenomena as such do not
themselves posses any actual and
tangible sensory form. By this I mean that though we may experience a phenomena
such as a ‘heavy red ball’ - seeing it, touching it, feeling it and picking it
up - we cannot pick up our sense of its heaviness, or our perception of its
roundness or redness. For redness and roundness as such exist only as
ideas – in reality there being no pure or perfectly round objects and no way of
perceiving ‘redness’ independently of a particular hue of red. Indeed the
phenomenal form we perceive and think of as ‘a ball’ is not itself anything
material or actual, for the very idea of ‘ballness’ is rooted in potential ways
of actively relating to the phenomenon – of handling, throwing or kicking it
for example.
Whereas the sensory experience of a phenomenal form is something
physically tangible, the very patterns and qualities that constitute phenomenal
forms, though we take them as objective are, are essentially ‘all in the mind’.
Forms are mental ‘ideas’ – which is why the Greek word eidos meant both ‘idea’ and ‘form’. In the history of European
thought it was Plato who first argued for the pure ideality of material forms, seeing experienced or ‘phenomenal’ forms as their shadow
reflection. Plato understood pure Ideas or Forms as belonging to an immaterial
and transcendent realm. Aristotle understood matter (Greek hyle) as potentiality, and form (morphe) as actuality. Actuality results from a capacity (dynamis) for formative activity (energeia) – a process of actualisation
which leads towards the realisation of an ideal form or pattern (entelecheia) that is not transcendent
but immanent in all things as their
inner aim, purpose or direction of development (telos). Similarly, Thomas Aquinas, following Aristotle, understood
‘primary matter’ (Prima Materia) as
nothing actual or substantial but rather as pure potentiality - a type of
formless and ‘passive potentiality’ inseparable from God as ‘active
potentiality’, the potentiality for the emergence of actual form and for change
of form or transformation. These Aristotelian understandings of ‘matter’ are
reflected today in Rupert Sheldrake’s notion of biological forms and
transformations as a result of ‘morphogenesis’ - the progressive actualisation
of non-physical patterns or ‘morphic fields’.
The accusation levelled against the ‘God-concept’ of religion – namely
that God cannot be actually seen, has no sensory qualities or definable
location apply equally to the Matter-concept of science. Both the God-concept
and the Matter-concept can be seen as substitutes or ‘placeholders’ for the
recognition of that womb-like realm of Potentiality – that is no less real than anything we actually
experience. Physical ‘matter’ is real only in the root sense of the word -
being the divine ‘mother’ [mater] and
‘mind’ of all things - a womb of
potentiality bearing within the mental patterns, idea-shapes or matrices of all possible actualities.
This is not a new thought but one long recognised by philosophers, physicists
and theologians alike.
‘Matter’ can be seen as the very ‘mind’ of God - understood as an awareness of every potential pattern or
‘idea-shape’ of things. This being the case, who should mind and why should it
matter if we call the primordial awareness mind or matter, ‘The Mind of God’, ‘The
Great Mother’, ‘The Matrix’ or the ‘Prima Materia’? If you don’t mind,
it doesn’t matter. Yet if ‘It’, this universal or divine ‘mother’, ‘mind’ or
‘matrix’ of all things, didn’t quite literally ‘matter’ – materialising and
actualising itself from a realm of pure
potentiality - there would literally be
no thing that we could either experience or conceive of scientifically as physical ‘matter’. What we experience
as physical matter emerges or manifests from the realm of the Potential – this
very process of ‘emergence’ (Greek physis)
being the root meaning of the terms ‘physics’ and ‘physical’ themselves. Any
‘meta-level’ consideration of the nature of ‘physics’ is of course, by nature
‘meta-physical’ – transcending the bounds of physics as a science. Yet the
latter, as we have seen, leads us right back to the multiple metaphysical
realms of reality - understood as dimensions of a Universal Awareness Field.
No comments:
Post a Comment