Witnessing, Pre-State and Eligibilities
Witnessing happens; questions happen and then, the consciousness journeys the pathways of probabilities of answers. I witness Me in so many probabilistic dimensions and wonder – Did the evolution design brains to witness definitiveness of singular reality through the dialectical progression of questions-answers or is it purely and exclusively human trajectory, as humanity consciously channeled its ‘brain-ability’ to such levels of thoughtfulness, where reality becomes only a probability? As ‘I’ keeps Witnessing ‘Me’, probabilities unravel all mathematics, biology and poetry of life-living. The realities of I, Me and Witnessing apart; the actuality of the very process of I Witnessing Me is a marvelously mystical potential. The most exhilarating part however is that modern science has deciphered the body-brain mechanisms of this process of I Witnessing Me and ancient spiritual philosophies have documented its artistry thousands of years back.
Witnessing itself is baffling; even invitation to trepidation and precarious experiencing. Observing is not witnessing; is it? Observing itself seems preliminary act or pre-state of witnessing; is it? Strangely enough, but not so mystically; witnessing seems to be happening; without observing and even aloof to observance ritualism; aint it? Witnessing does not seem like a truly sensory process. It may very well be a cognitive reality of the higher consciousness. Or, is it something like a holographic event, in which the event seems to be happening somewhere, but its causal structures are somewhere else?
I, As It Witnesses Me, very much seems like a multidimensional and multi-causal reality. This complexity about realities, especially human realities and their inexplicably cocktailed experiences, are treasures of unimaginable worth and utility. They are worth witnessing; when processes of witnessing finally actualize them at the registry of cognitive reality. But then, treasures are not available without eligibilities. Observance may be a mechanism; witnessing is very much like processes. ‘I’ also observes ‘Me’ but ‘I’ needs potential-optimization of consciousness evolving to internalize the processes of witnessing.
The realities of I, Me and Milieus, their witness-able landscapes and experience-able dimensions are all very much embedded and entrenched in tangible processes of brain states and plexuses but their functional manifestations and cognitive registry need eligibility of Consciousness. It is not easy to understand the intricacy involved in above expressions but it can be understood peripherally by an example.
Most people, as is the populist desirability regime in modern cultures, spend their entire life laboring hard to attain and possess all material successes and consumptive stuffs to lend Happiness to their body and mind. This is not easy; it requires eligibility, which is acquired after years of hard work and dedication. Only a miniscule minority of less than 5-10 percent people become successful. There is however, another process, where the body-brain itself creates Happiness, without the help of any external entity. Unlike the first process; where external entities are earned to provide happiness to body; in the second process, the body creates loads of pleasures, happiness and satisfaction for its own utility. This second process is probably tougher. It also requires eligibilities; very different from the former and one that is rare and available only to handfuls.
The eligibilities seem two-fold – first and foremost is probably the eligibility to realize and internalize the very idea-idealism of dualism of consciousness, in terms of ‘I’ and ‘Me’. Secondly, there are these very precious and hugely satisfying processes of witnessing realities in their holism and multidimensionality. This requires eligibility to actualize and experience the probability of I Witnessing Me. Very naturally; the questions come – What are these eligibilities? How do they come about? More importantly; what ultimate attainments this eligibility shall lead to?
The very reality of ‘I’ is mesmerizing as well as mystical. This precarious and probabilistic relationship between ‘I’ and ‘Me’ is far more magical. The potential of I and its relationship with cognitive imageries and landscapes are brilliant tools for creation of worth-utilities, which need no investment, stressful struggle and competitiveness with others. In fact, this internalization of happiness process is vitiated and emaciated when ‘I’ is mired in the depraved-criminalized external milieus and its scammed populist benchmarks of success-worth. This very realization in human consciousness is almost 3000 years old; duly documented in ancient Indian philosophy of Yoga.
This relationship of ‘I’ with ‘Me’, you, milieus and extensive realities beyond known and unknowable has scientific basis and is peripherally explainable; thought not fully. Many, who are very sure of their intuitive perceptions as ultimate knowledge, are prompt to label all these as hallucinations and a psychedelic reality. They are not wholly wrong; though averse to holism of reality. Psychedelic states are very much like rituals, which one can accept as some inseparable part of religion but not religion itself. That is why, since early history; humanity and different means of inebriation have always been together. May be, it is not as unclear to say that rituals most necessarily came first; religion only followed them. Probably; those, who could manage to have the tough eligibility of I Witnessing Me; actualized and evolved to religion, even while mass majority of humans felt fruition in following rituals only. It is like mass majority of people feel it right to spend lives chasing happiness to body, even when the body itself has eligibilities to engender most precious of the happiness. Witnessing has probabilities, which ritualism of observance denies. Religion as internal utility-worth is denied as ritualism insists to define it as demonstrativeness of externalities. The science of ritualism and propensities of consciousness for demonstrativeness is another domain; not to be deliberated in this eBook. May be sometimes later; if life permits!
From great poets, painters, philosophers to common men; psychedelic state has lured everyone. This itself is probably the greatest proof that ‘I’ feels something good and worth being in a state, which lends its cognition and feel more latitude to journey into novel and alternative landscapes, otherwise not possible. This is another dimension of I Witnessing Me.
There have been many instances of near death experiences narrated by people. Most people describe the feel and experience as something so uniquely pleasant that they felt like not coming back to life-living. There can be endless debate over the issue but one probability always remains that the ‘I’ is still there and it is clearly witnessing its ‘Me’ in some dimension of reality and certain manifestation of consciousness, the cognition of which is unique, calming and very pleasurable. It is hugely tough to describe the experience, which actualizes at the portals of impending nothingness and that too, to a cognitive registry of a person, whose body-brain must not be in a state, a normal and healthy people have. What is the eligibility of the momentous reality of the brain states, which makes such a witnessing possible? What does this very calming and pleasurable mean to the consciousness of a person, who is witnessing the very critical situation? All these questions and probable answers are very much part of the inventory of the idea-idealism of I Witnessing Me, in its holism and multidimensionality. The question of eligibilities apart; the primary inquisition is – Where is the inclination, time and mental pre-state for such aspects of life-living among mass majority of people, who are singularly obsessed and indulged in amassing avenues for happiness to their bodies.
Moreover; what psychedelic state does to consciousness and cognition of reality and what the human brain can engender, without the psychedelic substances, is anybody’s guess. What rituals mean without the basis of religion and what religion can feel like, sans ritualism, is also anybody’s guess. For that matter, eligibilities and readiness for cognitive journeys into probabilities of landscapes of brilliant experiences are also within easy predictability; if there is willingness for novelty and alternativeness.
**