It is interesting to reflect on how many proposed 'methods' there are for 'raising consciousness'.
In the mainstream, this refers to use of the mass media, education and propaganda to manipulate public opinion. It means, roughly, getting people to think about some-thing - in either a positive or negative way.
For example, to become aware of some rare type of disease, so that they might contribute money to organizations purporting to 'do something' for sufferers or carers. Or to turn public opinion against to actual or virtual group of people by linking a name with alleged acts of meanness, crime, terrorism.
This stuff is the staple of daily public discourse in all modern institutions (including most Christian churches).
A small version of the mechanism can be seen in this blog, or any communication medium including speaking.
I used to think of my writings as potentially able to spread to almost anywhere, on the basis that such things have happened: a few words written in a specific place have propagated and been reproduced to reach vast numbers of people (who maybe 'needed' them, or alternatively were vulnerable to them) - and these communications (words, images, music etc.) have an apparent effect on them.
Another version of the idea is that God works through us - and God can and will amplify our works to reach many people - when this is helpful for God's purposes. The creator need not worry or concern himself about 'spreading the word', or 'reaching an audience', but only about creating some good communication - and God will do the rest.
In New Age type spirituality circles, raising consciousness often refers to a proposed mechanism whereby the spiritual level of large numbers of people (or all people) is lifted by some kind of external effect. A divine being or tendency may increase the frequency or vibrational level acting-upon human - which is presumed to awaken or spiritualize their thinking and living.
Or an individual who meditates (in the proper fashion) is assumed to have a very general and beneficial effect on everybody in the world; implicitly perhaps by some (probably very small) enhancement of an sort of 'spiritual ether' that is 'bathing' all our consciousnesses...
So when that medium of consciousness is enhanced by the mental efforts of one or many spiritual persons, it is suggested that we all experience this enhancement (or could do, if we became attuned to it).
I think of these are 'physicsy' ways of thinking; which regarded spirituality rather like the radiations of the sun, incident upon the earth - perhaps some kind of cosmic ray that passes through the earth but potentially interacts with welcoming or susceptible minds en route.
The way in which I tend to suppose consciousness can be raised posits a 'world of thought'. Or, more exactly, not all thoughts (which are mostly trivial, passive, 'automatic') but a world of 'real' thought, primary thoughts, thoughts that originate from our true and divine selves when we are living as free agents.
This world of thoughts is contributed-to by many thinking Beings (living and 'dead', incarnated and spiritual, human and otherwise). This world of thinking may be accessed by anybody (any Being) who actively chooses to communicate with it.
Such a concept privileges thoughts and their direct sharing or interaction, mind to mind; above the indirect and multistep processes of public communications and media. This I call 'direct knowing' and I regard it as the basis of genuine intuition.
By this account, if I have an idea or an insight; then it is the having of it that matters more than the physical expression. For instance, it is implied that having the idea for this blog post was more important than writing and publishing that idea.
Did I then really need to write and publish this post? Would it not have been just as good - maybe better (because more direct) to think but not publish it?
Yet there is a middle ground; which is that (for me, anyway) writing is thinking - at least to a significant extent; and further that writing-thinking is (for me) improved by the intent to publish, or share, it.
In a sense, often (but not always) I do not really know my idea until I am writing it, or have written it. The process of writing seems to accelerate the evaluation and clarification of ideas.
So consciousness is raised primarily by thinking, and this may secondarily amplified by communication.
And at the other end - the way in which we may each directly attune to the 'world of thinking' is (for most of us) difficult, intermittent - and only able to cope with simple concepts.
For instance, by direct thinking and knowing it is much more likely that we can discover a 'Yes or No' answer to a simple and precise question like 'should I quit my job?; than we could discern a plan of action in response to a question like 'what should I be doing with my life?'
Thus, given two Beings, both aligned with God and in sympathy, a physical communication like a blog post might be able to make a bridge to the world of thinking and direct knowing. So we might read (or listen, or view) a communication; and then (immediately upon comprehension) we may experience an intuitive confirmation of its validity.
The communication is therefore affirmed by direct knowing.
In this way, by accelerating our intuitive grasping of things, communications may help us discover and evaluate our primary assumptions concerning the world - establishing a metaphysical basis upon-which all other kinds of knowledge depend.
Note added: It is probably significant that I forgot to include what may have been the most prevalent or important form of consciousness raising at times and places in the past - which is by supernatural/ paranormal communications - such as dreams, visions (visual and auditory), visitations (by spiritual beings) and mediumship generally.
In sum - by perceptual contact with the spiritual world: e.g. an angel speaks, a vision is shown. And any communicated perception is subject to distortion at many stages.
I forgot to mention these, because such methods have become progressively less common, impossible for many people - and usually only attainable by deliberate practice or deliberate consciousness alteration. And all of these make any communications more liable to be misperceived or misunderstood; and which tend to impair discernment concerning the source and value of communications, and impair memory.
I believe that direct knowing is both superior - because it is direct and cuts-out the problems of distorted perception, misunderstanding etc - and also that direct knowing is the destined way that modern Men in modern conditions are intended (by God) to have consciousness raised. A way that cannot be interfered-with by evil external powers.
thank you Bruce.
I made a post about this very topic. The difficulty in blogging as you do is to translate direct knowing into words. The translation can end up a dilution or distortion. I was pondering myself whether there was good purpose in writing these things down, but it's clear that the process of translating direct knowing into words *can* be beneficial both for writer and reader, when done with proper motivation. The goodness of your efforts on this blog, by example, are obvious to me.
This post reminds me of what CS Lewis said when he related the story of the RAF aviator who claimed to have seen God in the Desert and therefore didn’t need all Lewis’s detailed information. What the aviator failed to realize is that while his experience may have been supernatural, it is like a person who views the ocean by looking upon a beach. While that is a very real experience, it lacks additional information (what I term richness of data) that is contained in a map. Moreover, if one wants to sail from London to New York, one needs more than just the information revealed by viewing the beach, one needs that map. Thank you for your wonderful and insightful posts.
When a medium receives a communication of some type it is usually meant for his growth. Direct communication from a spiritual source is not to be doubted when it comes to him but it is in the trying to communicate its' importance to others that the distortion arises. I used to think being a medium meant some kind of "mission" to show the reality of the spirit world, now I accept the communications as meant to move me vertically not horizontally, as in giving information or details. Receiving communications results in a deep dive in consciousness which really cannot be shared.
@ag - "Direct communication from a spiritual source is not to be doubted when it comes to him"
A further factor is that communications seem to come from a variety of spiritual sources, some/many of whom are not reliable. Apparently, there are 'low level' spirits, that are variable in motivation and knowledge, much like people. So discernment is needed for this kind of thing, just as in mundane experience.
Post a Comment