First things first

[Excerpt Be and Become, © ProCreative, Sydney 2000]

One of the difficulties in relating to the ideas presented in this book is that they need to be felt, rather than simply thought. In Western societies we are more “objectively” orientated than native or traditional Eastern cultures. As explained in Chapter Three, we therefore bias our perceptions in terms of objective facts, while we discount the validity of mystery, magic and feelings. As a result much of this book may not be believable or acceptable from an objective, scientific perspective, even though the ideas presented are, I believe, consistent and rational.

Unless we feel them we will not believe in them, irrespective of the efficacy, rationality or validity of the ideas. In view of the fact that our emotions (feelings) largely follow our beliefs, it becomes particularly important to gain a truer understanding of our reality.

The realization that we feel in response to how we think is vitally important if we seek to come to terms with the idea that the universe and everything within it is a self-organising system.

In view of the foregoing, it is not surprising that many people prefer to build a credible understanding of how things work before they will allow themselves the courage to explore the spiritual (unknowable). In Western societies it is generally necessary for our rational-thinking ego awareness to develop before we can expect our physical and emotional senses to tune into new spheres of experience. Our emotions (via urges, inklings, leanings, gut feelings, yearnings) may motivate us to explore new experiences, but if our conscious reasoning mind is not able to make some sense of the ensuring experiences then we invariably witness stress and dis-ease within the individual. For example, without a philosophical framework which teaches us that living is inherently safe, we will not be spontaneous and free to be ourselves.

Without a congruent philosophical framework, we can expect to observe (as we do) people attempting to squeeze their intuitive emotional experiences into illogical, unreasonable outmoded cultural frameworks. In particular, I refer here to the subject of superstition. Superstition develops when the conscious-reasoning mind cannot translate intuitive feelings into a viable rational understanding. The rise of fundamentalist religious cults throughout the world is due in part to people’s burgeoning intuitive awareness not being able to be squeezed into outmoded cultural and scientific frameworksi. With quantum physics having shown reality to be fundamentally nonlocal, the cat has been well and truly, and irreversibly, let out of the box, so to speak:

Only by recognizing that reality is innately nonlocal (infinitely interconnected) can we begin to make sense of feelings such as intuition and precognition.

As covered in the previous chapter, many sense there is “something in the air” and that something is the realization that reality is nonlocal (infinitely interconnected). We must recognize that through intuitive, precognitive, nonlocal senses everyone is already (subconsciously) aware of these developments in physics and of what will be made of them in the future. Great change is coming and deep down, people intuitively feel it.

To better prepare and engage this change, it behoves us to come to a fuller understanding of how reality actually functions. Otherwise, superstitious irrational fundamentalist cultures will grow in relevance and influence with subsequent adverse effects upon all of us.

From my observations of the present state of the world, I believe the need for a more congruent rational understanding of how reality works to be a profoundly important one. We still observe large numbers of people who routinely behave poorly towards others. We observe that they invariably use religion or some other cultural framework to justify their actions. Even in extreme cases of genocide the perpetrators invariably find justification for their actions. The leader of the Khmer Rouge, Pol Pot under whose command up to 2 million Cambodians were tortured and murdered said after his arrest that “My conscience is clear.”1

Throughout history, as indeed within present cultures, we observe that morality and ethics have been largely driven by the prevailing cultural beliefs. For example, slavery, which is generally considered in modern times to be unjust, immoral and a denial of basic human rights was widely practised throughout nearly all cultures for much of recorded history. What we find objectionable and immoral today was often considered normal and just in previous generations.

Conversely what we (generally) find acceptable in modern society, such as homosexuality was often illegal and considered immoral by our forebears.

In many of the group discussions I have attended I invariably find that the course of discussion is driven by deeply held beliefs and feelings. Feelings which are, once again, from my experience, based on flawed beliefs. It is my experience that a great deal of energy is wasted by people who subscribe to beliefs which are incongruent with the deeper aspects of our shared reality. The shifting sands of morality and ethics will continue to shift and change in accord with the changes in cultural awareness and technological development. I believe that any concerted, productive discussion on morals and ethics needs to be preceded by an in-depth understanding of how reality actually works. Otherwise we will continue to observe people such as Pol Pot finding justification for any number of violations against the integrity and well-being of others.

Another reason that one might have difficulty relating to the ideas in this book is that the words I have used are normally associated with human behavior. For example, I suggested that chairs are somehow “choosing” to be chairs, but the word “choice” has many connotations associated with human intelligence. Perhaps if I used words such as “field,” or “energy” we might then get a better feel for the ideas. For example, we might prefer to say that chairs have a certain energy about them, or they are surrounded by a certain field. But by using such words we can skirt the central issue which is that atoms and molecules and other bits of inanimate matter do in fact have some form of limited volition (as indicated by quantum theory).

• 1. “Sayings of the Year,” Sydney Morning Herald, December 27, 1997, page 14 News Review.