Goodbye to “It”

All somethings are someones.  –David Spangler

That quote hit me in a way that the usual psychospiritual talk doesn’t. It forced me to face up to the assumptions I have about the nature of life itself (and what is alive and what isn’t). I certainly don’t relate to most somethings as someones.  Could I bear putting the coffee beans in the grinder if I saw them as little someones? Could I throw away that shirt I haven’t worn in 5 years if she (la chemise) was a someone? Granted, sometimes I talk to my computer as if it were a someone (“Why won’t you do what I want you to do?!”), but I’m more talking out my own frustration.

That quote also sums up the current shift in perspective in four simple words. I would add to it “all someones are me/us.” Which really means that I/we am/are all someones. That simple statement is revolutionary.  Yes, you have heard it before in different forms, such as “we are all one” or “the earth is a living being,” but this form makes it clear that the world is being turned inside-out and upside-down. No not just that, the inside/outside boundary is being dissolved but not destroyed. It’s more like an exoskeleton is being turned into a cell wall. I am struggling to put this into language because the boundaries between concepts (and hence words) are so rigid in English.

Mr. Spangler is giving voice in everyday language to something the scientists are also saying, namely that matter is secondary to consciousness. Consciousness is the primary reality of the universe, what enables it—us—to be here. We will look at what the scientists are saying in more detail in a later post.

To conceive of the world not as filled with things but as filled with points of consciousness radically alters one’s own being and doing. Essentially each and every point is its own point of consciousness, and many points make up a larger point, such as me or the chair I’m sitting in, the violet on the windowsill, and so on.  Each is a holon, a part that is also a whole. Each holon has its own sovereignty, and each is comprised of parts that have their own sovereignty as well.  For example, I am made up of billions of cells, and each cell in my body has its own sovereignty, and each subcellular structure, even each base of my DNA has its own sovereignty.  As the former cell biologist Bruce Lipton says, “you are in truth a cooperative community of approximately 50 trillion single-celled citizens” (The Biology of Belief, p. 27). The quantum physicists are finding that you can keep dividing and dividing. You never get to the bottom, to the most fundamental “bit.”  Why? Because we can continue to conceive that there are more fundamental bits. Our ability to imagine them, to conceive of them enables there to be more.  So is that where it starts—with us?  Back to the idea that each “thing” is a point of consciousness or sentience. This is profound because it implies the possibility of communication. In a world of nonsentient things, there is no possibility for communication; however, with the realization that all of “it” is sentient at some level (not necessarily the same level that we are), there exists the possibility that there can be communication. But in what form? Communication happens at many different levels, from chemically based communication in between cells and between plants, to verbal to structural (body language) to energetic (“I was just thinking about you! What a coincidence that you called.”), and probably many others of which we are not yet aware.  How does one communicate with these other forms of sentience?  This is where we have to examine internal/external again and see that communicating externally, the way we talk to each other now, is only one way. What might others be?

This entry was posted in Assumptions/presuppositions, Language, Science and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.