«

»

Apr 14 2013

The 3 dilemmas of creation

multidimensional creation - credit aumega artThe following concepts are purposely broad, vague and abstract. They are meant to encompass all of existence or the multidimensional universe (All That Is).

  • Action – psychological motion; thought; emotion
  • Consciousness – awareness, sentience
  • Identity – artificial differentiation through purposeful limitation of perspectives

All three concepts are technically the same and could be equated. They are artificially distorted/separated to try and make sense of what would appear to be paradoxes. They are merely different ways of understanding the base stuff of the universe. It is probably best to think of the universe as being a psychological construct of the mind of god. This is known as panpsychism. Every person, tree, rock & atom is made up of psychological mind stuff. Viewing the universe as made up of psychological mind “stuff” will help you understand these concepts better. The entire universe is alive. Everything fundamentally is mind. Creators and creations are the same thing.

The universe is fundamentally one thing, all separation is an illusion. Space is an illusion as well and this is a principle of non-locality. Illusory physical materialization come from deeper psychological illusions that create them. Psychological illusions are created because of the three dilemmas. It is through the three dilemmas that the universe creates, first psychologically and then a portion of that becomes material.

Briefly the three dilemmas of the multidimensional universe are:

  1. The impossibility of inner vitality to completely materialize.
  2. Identity will continually seek stability, while stability is impossible.
  3. Birth of Ego. Consciousness of self attempts to separate itself from action, this is impossible, since consciousness or identity is inseparable from action.

———————–

The following is an excerpt from the Seth Early Sessions Book 3 Session 138-141

“Identity then, is action’s effect upon itself. Without identities action would be meaningless, for there would be nothing upon which action could act. Action must, therefore, of its very nature, of itself and from its own workings, create identities. Again, action and identity cannot he separated. This applies from the most simple to the most complex. Once more, action is not a force outside that acts upon matter. Action is, instead, the inside vitality of the inner universe. It is the dilemma between inner vitality’s desire and impetus to completely materialize itself, and its inability to completely do so….

….Action is therefore a part of all structure. Here again is an apparent dilemma, an exquisite imbalance whose result is consciousness and existence. For consciousness and existence do not exist because of delicate balances, so much as they are made possible by lacks of balances, so richly creative there would be no reality as it is understood to be, it balance were ever maintained.

I spoke of this second dilemma. The first dilemma is that which exists when inner vitality struggles to completely materialize, though it cannot completely materialize. The reasons for its inability to completely materialize have been given in a previous session, and I will discuss the matter again at a later date.

This first dilemma results in action, and from action’s own working upon itself we have seen that identity was formed, and that these two are inseparable….

…we will speak of our second dilemma.

Action, having of itself, and because of its nature, formed identity, now also because of its nature would seem to destroy identity, since action must involve change. And any change would seem to threaten identity.

It is however a mistaken notion that identity is dependent upon stability. Identity, because of its characteristics, will continually seek stability, while stability is impossible. And this is our second dilemma.

multidimensional strain abstract experIt is this dilemma, precisely between identity’s constant attempts to maintain stability, and actions inherent drive for change, that results in the imbalance, the exquisite creative by-product that is consciousness of self. We have a series of creative strains. Identity must seek stability while action must seek change, yet identity could not exist without change, without action, for it is the result of action, and not apart from it but a part of it.

Identities are never constant, as you yourselves are not the same consciously or unconsciously from one moment to another. Every action is a termination, as we discussed earlier. And yet without the termination, identity would cease to exist, for consciousness without action would cease to be conscious.

Consciousness therefore is not a thing in itself. It is a dimension of action. It is an almost miraculous state, made possible by what I choose to call a series of creative dilemmas…

…It should be fairly easy to understand now how the second dilemma evolved from the first. I have said that the second dilemma resulted in, and constantly results in, consciousness of self. Now. Consciousness of self is not the same thing as consciousness of ego self. Consciousness of self is still consciousness directly connected with action.

Ego consciousness is the result of our third dilemma…

The ego is a state resulting from the third creative dilemma, which happens when consciousness of self attempts to separate itself from action.

Since this is obviously impossible, since no consciousness or identity can exist without action, because they are inseparable, we have our third dilemma.

A note of further explanation here. The difference between consciousness of self as a result of our second dilemma, and ego consciousness as a result of our third dilemma, should be made very clear.

Consciousness of self involves a consciousness of self within, amid, and as a part of action. Ego consciousness, on the other hand, involves a state in which consciousness of self attempts to divorce itself from action, an attempt on the part of consciousness to perceive action as an object. Here we see that ego consciousness, in this attempt, strives to perceive action not only as separate, but to perceive it in such a fashion that it appears to ego that action is not only separate from itself, that is separate from the ego, but that action is initiated by the ego, and a result rather than a cause of ego’s own existence.

These three dilemmas represent three areas of reality within which inner reality, or inner vitality, can experience itself. And here we have also the reason, or one of the reasons why, inner vitality can never achieve complete materialization. The very action involved in vitality’s attempt to materialize itself adds to the inner dimension of inner vitality.

Seed a UniverseAction basically can never complete itself. Inner vitality, materializing in any form whatsoever, at once multiplies the possibilities of further materialization. At the same time, because inner vitality is self-generating, only a minute fraction of inner vitality is needed to seed a whole universe.

Inner vitality attempts therefore to materialize itself completely, and yet because of its very nature, with each materialization it increases itself, making the attempt impossible. This is the basic dilemma, from which all types of reality spring….”

“…I have said that identity is a part of action, and basically inseparable from action. Identity attempts to form meaningful patterns and relationships from action. Consciousness is action that perceives itself. The ego is action’s attempt to stand off from itself.

Action may show itself as motion, but it is much more than motion in the terms which you usually use, and motion is but one small dimension within actions realm. All types of consciousness represent a different focus of energy’s perception within itself. There is no past or future to action. All action is simultaneous. Identities, some identities and some forms of consciousness, particularly the ego, perceive a past or a present, but this is merely the result of the manner in which such identities and consciousnesses view available data.

A consciousness is characterized by the particular ways in which it views or perceives available action. It is characterized by the type of action which it is more likely to perceive. It is characterized by the pattern of perception itself.

Since action is not apart from structure, but is indeed the formulator of structure, then it is obvious that generally the type, nature, extent and scope of characteristic perception patterns of a consciousness will determine its physical structure, and not the other way around. There is no one particular pattern followed by consciousness in its perception of itself as action. Mankind is more familiar with certain patterns and relatively unfamiliar with others. Any action changes itself. Nothing is constant. This rule is not forced upon action from some outside agency, but is simply a part of its own nature.

Action, you may say, is carried away by itself. Reality possibilities are endless. You are familiar with very small portions of reality. Your perception characteristics at this time dictate and limit the aspects of action that you can perceive. You can, however, focus very clearly on other aspects. And particular types of consciousnesses and identities are merely the result of action’s formation into perception patterns with which it can focus upon certain aspects of itself.

It may be thought that such perception patterns or identities may be limited, but this is hardly the case. For without them, whole portions of reality would never be perceived. There is much here that will take us a long while to explain, for the line can theoretically be drawn anywhere in the formation of identities and consciousness. And herein lies your freedom.

The dimensions of consciousness are not arbitrary. They are not clearly drawn. They are open, they are action.

They are a dimension, as I mentioned. Consciousness is not one thing, therefore consciousness is not of itself limiting. Boundaries may be set terms of a self. A self is a gestalt of action perception patterns, which are formed together through attraction.

This, when it occurs, and this particular formation into a self may or may not occur, but when it occurs it is a result of our second previously mentioned dilemma. The self as you know it is in actuality a self plus an ego.”

continued in my next post: The Ego

end of the road