(Originally published in The Seth Journal, Vol. 1, No. 3)

 

Who are you?

Who? Who?

Who? Who? – The Who, 1978.

 

Overview

 

This series of articles uses an integral conscious creation approach to explore the “levels of selfhood” in the work of Seth/Jane Roberts. Why are “levels of selfhood” important? If we explore the basic structures nested within the psyche and All-That-Is, then we can more accurately define the “You” in You Create Your Own Reality.

 

Conscious creation is the belief system that consciousness is primary and causal, not the other way around. Put simply, consciousness creates All; the body and brain are secondary, though they play very important roles. This isn’t a new idea, however; it’s present in all the perennial wisdom traditions (e.g. Buddhist, Hindu, Taoist, Sufi, Kabbalah, Christian mystics, etc.).

 

Integral conscious creation is a multidisciplinary method that integrates scientific, artistic, and moral perspectives within body, mind, and spiritual domains. “Integral” is a way to more holistically explore any body of work, including the Seth Material. The dictionary defines integral as “comprehensive, balanced, inclusive, and essential for completeness.” [1]

 

Though that covers a lot of ground, the intent is to look at the Seth Material from a wider lens – one that includes any relevant perennial wisdom source, channeled source, science, psychology, art, etc. All add their unique perspectives to further identify the “you” in you create your own reality.

 

Thus, the integral approach forces us to break out of “Seth says” or “Einstein says” as final truth by authority, and cross reference with other disciplines to see what they add to the mix. An integrally informed interpretation aims to mine new gems, while building bridges between science, art, and morals, within body, mind, and spirit. [2]

 

What’s the Best Way Approach the “You” in You Create Your Own Reality?

 

Originally, I began to explore the mechanics or “how” of conscious creation, but soon moved into the area of exploring the nature of personal reality in relation to the psyche and All-That-Is. Ontology is a fancy word used by philosophers, psychologists, and biologists to explore “the nature and relations of being.” So, ontology is just another way to say “levels of selfhood,” and puts the focus on the “who” of conscious creation.

 

In addition to basic “levels of selfhood” (ontology), however, there’s a counterpart we need to factor in – “levels of reality” (cosmology). This adds the “when,” “where,” and “what” of conscious creation to the mix. In terms of the Seth material, then, we need to consider Frameworks 1, 2, 3, 4, and All-That-Is. [3]

 

This is important because all the perennial wisdom traditions contain basic maps of “levels of selfhood” and “levels of reality.” Scholars like Huston Smith, Rene Guenon, Ananda Coomaraswamy, Fritjof Schuon, and Ken Wilber have compared these “maps.” They point out a general spectrum of consciousness from body, to mind, to soul, and spirit (selfhood) in relation to manifest, transcendent, and omniscient domains (reality). [4] Thus, humans have mapped the psyche and All-That-Is for thousands of years, and there are significant similarities found across cultures and milieus that we can compare to the Seth material.

 

Idea Constructions

 

Jane Roberts wrote The Physical Universe As Idea Construction in September 1963 during a powerful three-hour altered state that set the stage for Seth to “come through” on the Ouija board later that December. Parts of Idea Construction outlined multidimensional selfhood (ontology). I’ve added Seth’s terms in brackets.

 

“Energy [consciousness] is the basis of the universe.

 

“Ideas are mental transformations of energy by an entity [inner ego] into physical reality [outer ego].

 

“Idea constructions are transformations of ideas into physical reality.

 

“Space is where our own idea constructions do not exist in the physical universe.”

 

“… The subconscious is the threshold [or mediating “layer”] of an idea’s emergence into the individual conscious mind. It connects the entity [inner ego] and the individual [outer ego]. [5]

 

Jane’s Idea Construction laid a theoretical foundation for what would be fleshed out over the next twenty-one years in collaboration with Seth and Rob Butts. It hinted at the basic “levels of selfhood” that Seth would flesh out during the first year of sessions. It also hinted at the basic “levels of reality” (four Frameworks of consciousness) that Seth would later introduce. Here’s more from Idea Construction.

 

“Each evolutionary change is preceded and caused by a new idea. As the idea is in the process of being constructed onto the physical plane, it prepares the material world for its own actuality and creates the prerequisite conditions.

 

“Evolution is energy’s movement toward conscious expression in the physical universe, but it is basically nonphysical. A species at any given time is the materialization of the inner images or ideas of its individual members, each of whom forms their own idea constructions.

 

“… After death, the entity [inner ego] will have its ghost images (memories) at its command, though their apparent sequence will no longer apply. Memories are properties of the subconscious energy entity and, as such, are indestructible (though they may be unavailable to the individual under various circumstances).

 

“The next plane of existence [i.e. Framework of consciousness] will involve further training in energy use and manipulation, since the energy of which the entity [inner ego] is composed is self-generating and always seeking more complicated form and awareness.

 

“Each material particle is an idea construction formed by the individualized bits of energy [6] that compose it. [7]

 

Jane’s “idea constructions” weren’t a new concept, but rather a contemporary translation of a perennial truth. For example, the Idealist philosophers in the West from Plato to Plotinus, Shelling, Fichte, and Hegel all saw the physical world as a construction by a hidden source domain. Plato’s cave is a famous metaphor that compares human perception to viewing shadows on a wall, while the source “light” lies “outside” the cave. Still, in this early context constructions are the basic metaphor used to introduce the action of conscious creation.

 

The Outer Ego, Subconscious, and Inner Ego

 

The nine volumes of The Early Sessions (1997-2002) contain many new ideas that weren’t published during Jane’s lifetime (1929-1984). They provide even greater detail of the psyche than such early books as How to Develop You ESP Power (1966) and The Seth Material (1970). For example, the following is from Book 1, session 35. It outlines a basic three-part structure or “levels” of the psyche: outer ego, subconscious, and inner ego. Notice how Seth integrated the concept of inner senses in this explanation. [8] Also, I added my own clarifications in brackets.

 

“You may have experiences through all [nine] of the inner senses but not at once. This is a great simplification. What I should perhaps add for the sake of clearness is that you will not as a rule be aware of data that comes to you through more than one sense, inner sense, at a time.

 

“The fact is that the whole self is constantly experiencing data from all of the inner senses. The inner ego is of course aware of this. The subconscious is sometimes aware of this, and the outer ego is aware of very little. I have explained the reasons for this in past sessions. The outer ego must concentrate much of its energy toward survival in and manipulation of the outer camouflage world [Framework 1]. This world has already been created by the inner self, and its continuing existence is determined by the constant vigilance of the inner self [i.e. the inner self is primarily causal, not the body or brain].

 

“Only when a certain level of confidence is reached can the outer ego afford to become familiar with these inner workings, at least on your plane [Framework 1]. Otherwise you would falter. As a rule, even though the whole self is capable of organizing the data from all of the inner senses, the subconscious can rarely receive such communications full blast; and the outer ego, concerned as it is with camouflage pattern, and really born [co-created] to deal with camouflage patterns, simply could not stand the shock of realization that a complete set of inner senses would bring.

 

“This sort of experience will always be shielded from the outer ego of necessity. Even a watered-down version of a direct inner experience is a shock to the outer ego on your plane, since the [outer] ego imagines itself and its own perceptions to be supreme [Primarily Causal]. You have no idea, even with what training you have, of how shattering such a complete experience would be to the outer ego… [This shattering is also called satori, moksha, remembrance of essence, etc. in various perennial traditions].” [9]

 

In summary, the basic “levels of selfhood” first introduced by Seth consisted of three general structures: [10]

 

-        Inner ego (= entity = source self = energy personality essence [11])

-        Subconscious (mediating “layer”)

-        Outer ego

 

Jane also referred to the same three-part structure in her three Aspect Psychology books: [12]

 

-        Source self (= inner ego = entity = energy personality essence)

-        Nuclear self (= subconscious)

-        Focus personality (= outer ego, probable selves)

 

These maps seem consistent, but so what? As I hope will become clear, it’s inaccurate to say that thought, emotion, and expectation alone create all reality. Also, if we ignore the basic deep structures outlined above, we marginalize the impact that our objective physical reality – brains, neurochemistry, and other bodily functions – plays in our perception and cognition.

 

Again, our integral approach includes objective and subjective perspectives. Seth and Jane focused on the subjective nature of consciousness as a reaction to the hegemony of materialist sciences that reduce all subjective experience into objective its, things, and processes. In other words, their work sought to rehabilitate the subjective dimensions of experience. However, we commit the same error when we marginalize objective, physical reality and collapse everything into subjective, inner experience, belief systems, feelings, intention, etc. The result is just another equally incomplete worldview that leads to all kinds of problems, as we’ll see later in Part 3.

 

Pyramid Energy Gestalts

 

Seth went on to introduce a “God concept” that was initially termed a “primary pyramid gestalt” and later All-That-Is. These concepts round out Seth’s version of the perennial spectrum of consciousness. They extend our “levels of selfhood” from body, to mind, to soul, and now to spirit. The following are from sessions 95 and 96.

 

“There is a constant, ever-enfolding [‘involution’] and ever-expanding [‘evolution’] reality. The pyramids of psychic gestalts of which I have spoken represent in your terms all beginnings and all endings, which again expand into new beginnings and new forms.” [13]

 

“There is no one reality. There are many, in fact infinite, realities. There is no beginning and end. When beginnings and endings are spoken of, the implication is always there, that there must be but one reality, and that it must have a beginning in time and an ending in time.

 

“… Realities merge, one into the other. Personalities, or any type of individualized energy, may pass through various realities. The appearance of energy in one form could be said to end in that form were it not for the existence of the spacious present, in which all realities are simultaneous.

 

“… It is true that the pyramid gestalts of which I have spoken can be said to merge into what you may refer to as a unitary and even sublime being, but this is grossly simplified.

 

“… you will see that while these pyramid energy gestalts do, on the one hand, achieve a unitary character and sublime intelligence, on the other hand they form only an approximation of humanity’s concept of a God. This unitary gestalt which we may call, and I prefer it to the word God, the primary energy gestalt [All-That-Is].

 

“This primary energy gestalt may be thought of as straddling all realities, or existing in the infinite realities of which we have spoken. Yet in this prime gestalt that is unitary, there is again an infinite diversity and literally numberless personalities. Nor are these personalities that compose the prime psychic gestalt dependent or submissive to any one dominating personality within the gestalt.” [14]

 

Seth would later make another distinction to show that the inner ego was, in turn, co-created by an individualized energy gestalt that was, in turn, co-created by All-That-Is. So he added another “level” that served as a mediating layer between All-That-Is and the inner ego. The following is from session 305.

 

“… Entities [inner egos] are obviously subdivisions of the whole, or All That Is. You retain your individuality as part of an entity, and the entity retains its individuality as a part of an energy gestalt.

 

“An energy gestalt maintains its individuality as a portion of All That Is. These are not impersonal energy forms. They are very highly individualized psychological entities. Their psychological development is far different than any that you know.

 

“There are simply psychological realities of which you are completely ignorant, and these are interwoven into energy frameworks containing dimensions you cannot understand.” [15]

 

In summary, the basic “levels of selfhood” presented in The Early Sessions consist of five general structures:

 

-        All-That-Is (nondual)

-        Energy gestalt (individuality = duality)

-        Inner ego (= entity = source self = energy personality essence)

-        Subconscious (meditating “layer”)

-        Outer ego

 

These five structures provide a simple map to show nested creation and co-creation in the context of basic ontology. Some perennial traditions use 3, 4, 7, or even more “levels of selfhood,” but don’t be fooled by these surface differences. They are all attempts to map The Infinite and are useful only insofar as they help us to directly experience the territory. For example, the Hindu tradition outlines:

 

-        Atman/Brahman

-        Causal body

-        Subtle body

-        Gross body

 

The Buddhist tradition outlines:

 

-        Buddha Nature

-        Alayavijnana

-        Manovijnana

-        Five sense vijnanas

 

The distinctions Seth made were only for purposes of illustration and are ultimately invisible. Just as we can discern distinct colors in a rainbow from a distance, as we peer closer we can see no clear divisions between main color groups. Thus, all five structures are nested and present at all times. As we’ll see, they work in concert to form the “you” who creates its own reality. So “you” are much more than your body and outer ego!

 

The Four Glasses Analogy: Perspectives and Space Continuums

 

We’ve outlined Seth’s basic “levels of selfhood” only to ballpark our discussion. Let’s return now to the more familiar body and outer ego structures to see what Seth had to say about their role in conscious creation.

 

The four glasses analogy was originally published in abridged form in The Seth Material (1970), but was fleshed out in much greater detail in The Early Sessions, Book 2 (1997). Seth used it to introduce the idea of individual perspectives and space continuums. The following is from session 68.

 

“… No material object of any kind is formed without the cooperation [a law of the inner universe [16]] and without the inner consent of the atoms and molecules that compose it. Form is not thrust upon matter.

 

“The atoms and molecules themselves, through their own capsule comprehension [an inner sense], form into particular objects under the direction, but not the coercion, of the individual who is in charge of any given particular physical construction.

 

“Without such cooperation no physical construction would be possible. I will, if I may, use our glass again to make another point clear.

 

“(Jane had prepared a glass of iced coffee before the session began. Now she lifted it to show Bill and me. At the same time, her voice began to grow somewhat deeper and stronger.)

 

“I have said that if five people seemed to view this glass, then what you would have in actuality would be five individual physical glasses. As you and Ruburt [Jane] and Mark [Bill] view this glass, each of you see a different glass.

 

“… Neither of you can see the glass that the others see. We spoke of this briefly. I would like to go into more detail. The three of you each create your own glass. You each create your own glass in your own personal perspective. Therefore, here you have three different glasses, but each one exists in a different perspective, in an entirely different space continuum.

 

“... Now Mark [Bill], you cannot see Joseph’s [Rob’s] glass, nor can he see your glass. This can be proven mathematically, and scientists are already working with the problem, though they do not understand the principles behind it.

 

“However there is a point, an infinitesimal point, where Mark’s [Bill’s] perspective, and yours, and Ruburt’s [Jane’s], overlap. Again, theoretically, if you could perceive that point, you could actually each see the other two physical glasses.

 

“Physical objects simply cannot exist unless they exist in a definite perspective and space continuum. But each individual creates his own space continuum.” [17]

 

Thus, there is a type of causality within each perspective and space continuum. Another interesting feature of the above excerpt is the use of so-called entity names [birth name in brackets] to represent Rob, Jane, friend’s, and student’s inner egos. In hindsight, it’s clear that this was another strategy designed to shift attention away from the primacy of bodies and outer egos.

 

A Universe or a Multiverse?

 

The four glasses analogy and earlier material on pyramid energy gestalts imply that there isn’t any single pregiven physical reality “out there” somewhere. In session 68 Seth said that,

 

“... it is completely erroneous to think in terms of one physical universe. You now exist in four different universes at this moment. That is, in the apparent space of one room, you will understand that there are four rooms.” [18]

 

From this perspective we can more accurately conceptualize Framework 1 as a multiverse. This means that there is no singular or absolute flow of linear time in relation to space. For example, Einstein’s relativity theory formalized this in terms of quantum science. Also, postmodern philosophers refer to the “myth of the given” – the error made when assuming that we’re studying a modern Newtonian machine clock universe “out there” in which space-time is absolute, linear, singular, and primary.

 

What does postmodern mean? Ideas, concepts, and theories that critique modernity as defined by the Western enlightenment, materialist science, idea of progress, etc. While these critiques are aimed modern religion and science, two favorite targets of Seth and Jane, they also attempt to provide new solutions and theories. In this sense, then, Seth and Jane’s work is postmodern.

 

Recent quantum string theorists (e.g. Brian Greene and peers) realize that space-time is not the primary building block of reality but the result of other still unknown processes at infinitesimal scales. But they are still locked in a modern reductionist and materialist paradigm, trying to find the basic “unit” of physicality without accounting for the consciousness of the researchers. For example, according to physicist Brian Greene,

 

“... quantum fluctuations so mangle space and time that the conventional ideas of left/right, backward/forward, up/down, and before/after become meaningless.

 

“Scientists are still struggling to understand these implications, but many agree that just as the percentages in political polls are average, approximate measures that become meaningful only when a large respondent pool is canvassed, so conventional notions of time and space are also average, approximate concepts that become meaningful only when considered over sufficiently large scales. Whereas relativity established the subjectivity of time’s passage, quantum mechanics challenges the conceptual primacy of time itself.

 

“Today’s scientists seeking to combine quantum mechanics with Einstein’s theory of gravity (the general theory of relativity) are convinced that we are on the verge of another major upheaval, one that will pinpoint the more elemental concepts from which time and space emerge. Many believe this will involve a radically new formulation of natural law in which scientists will be compelled to trade the space-time matrix within which they have worked for centuries for a more basic ‘realm’ that is itself devoid of time and space.” [19]

 

Yet, the quantum materialists will remain on the hamster wheel of “reductio ad absurdum” until they incorporate a viable postmodern theory of consciousness. This results in what American philosopher Ken Wilber calls “flatland,” when all subjective perspectives are reduced to its, things, or objects verified by only the five senses. In other words, materialism, reductionism, and scientism result when we claim that the five physical senses provide an absolute view of truth and reality.

 

Many now agree that modern materialist Newtonian worldviews are woefully incomplete. Yet, modern worldviews tenaciously hold that matter, and thus the body, is primarily causal in terms of body/mind consciousness. But according to the premodern perennial traditions, consciousness is primarily causal. Seth and Jane agree with the premodern traditions, and sharply disagree with the modern scientific traditions in this area.

 

This concept alone – consciousness is causal – would transform modern sciences (e.g. quantum, biological, chemical, neurological, psychological, etc.) into postmodern sciences. There has been a lot of excellent work in the twenty years since Jane’s passing toward the creation of a viable theory of consciousness. Physicists like Amit Goswami, Fred Wolf, and Peter Russell, and Philosophers like David Ray Griffin, Christian de Quincy, and Ken Wilber have made tremendous strides. This is something to keep in mind when reading Seth’s critique of modern sciences. That is, Seth’s critiques are no longer applicable to certain breakthroughs in post-1984 science because they existed only as latent probabilities relative to that past-present. However, they still apply to modern materialist science because they remain mired within the same narrow paradigm.

 

Now, if we take the four glasses analogy even further, we can speculate that each outer ego co-creates relative to its own perspective, space-time continuum, subconscious, and inner ego. Thus, each outer ego creates a unique version of objects and space-time, and a unique version of the multiverse. In this context, our body/minds are a kind of space-time “machine.” That is, our bodies, outer egos, subconscious, and inner egos simultaneously co-create space-time in nested fashion.

 

This notion of unique perspectives and continuums is also being explored in Ken Wilber’s latest theory (Wilber-5). He begins with the basic perspectives already contained within most languages: I, We, It, Its. These are the four basic perspectives the outer ego uses depending on various contexts. For example, when referring to self, “I” language is present. When referring to a group, institution, society, or entire species, “We” language is present. When referring to objects, processes, things, or anything not-self, “it” (singular) and “its” (plural) language dominates. According to Wilber, “Moving from perceptions to perspectives is the first radical step in the move from metaphysics to post-metaphysics.” [20]

 

Let’s not sweat the subtle details of integral post-metaphysics for now, but simply note that the early Seth sessions foreshadow leading-edge work being done some thirty-five years later that may lead to the emergence of authentic dream-art sciences introduced in The “Unknown” Reality, Vol. 1 (1997). [21] All of which will include a viable postmodern theory of consciousness and increased use of inner and outer senses.

 

Finally, let’s consider the distinction between so-called inert and active matter made in session 68. It hints at additional perspectives and space continuums within “inert” constructions.

 

“... There is one point from our previous discussion that should be added to. It is in terms of a clearer definition. You call matter living or dead according to quite arbitrary designations. We have a step further here to take. In our last session, I mentioned that you considered live matter [biological] to be action in motion.

 

“Actually, you consider action which seems to be at least partially self-directive as living matter. Action that seems to be of a static nature, you refer to as inert matter. It should go without saying that all action is indeed self-directed action to some degree, and therefore should be termed as living matter.” [22]

 

Therefore, we could also factor in the perspectives and space continuums of the table, glasses, magazines, paintings, carpet, air molecules, and on and on. Even though they don’t have an outer ego, subconscious, or inner ego like humans, they are formed by a type or species of consciousness that is distinct from humans and energy personality essences. The permutations are mind boggling, but the point is simple: the modern notion of a singular universe “out there” somewhere is being replaced by the postmodern notion of a multiverse and nested perspectives, even the perspectives of “inert” matter.

 

Primary and Secondary Constructions

 

So how does consciousness, which is not a thing, really No-thing, manage to create Some-thing? In other words, how does The One (All-That-Is) create the many?

 

We just saw that, according to Seth, our outer egos perceive through a unique perspective and space continuum. But as we’ll see in session 71, there’s much more going on than meets the eye of flesh. And, even though this session focuses on primary and secondary constructions, Seth hints at additional subdivisions and types of constructions involved in conscious creation. Thus, the idea of primary and secondary are only meant to ballpark us, and are in no way final.

 

“... I would like to continue our discussion on matter. If you recall, we were entering into primary and secondary constructions.

 

“There are of course many subdivisions here, and also other types of constructions. We will begin however with primary and secondary ones.

 

“A primary construction is a psychic gestalt, formed into matter by a consciousness [inner ego] of itself. Such a primary construction is an attempt to create, in the world of matter, a replica of the inner psychic construction of the whole self [inner ego].

 

“Such a primary construction allows consciousness to operate, manipulate and be perceived in the world of matter. The physical construction of consciousness never is complete as far as fulfilling the inner purpose is involved; that is, consciousness can never fully construct itself in matter, and to do so would indeed imprison such a consciousness so that it could not escape the transient nature of matter itself.

 

“Even a primary construction, therefore, is but a partial appearance of inner nature into matter. The term consciousness, as I am here using it, may need some explanation, although you should by now understand my meaning.

 

“... What you consider your consciousness, or your self, or your thinking [outer] ego, represents of course only one portion of your entire consciousness, that part which you are using at this time. It is as if, for example, consciousness of any whole self [inner ego] were compared to a huge, and indeed almost infinite light, with the ability inherent in the light to focus in many directions; to be diffused, as if the light had many switches that would turn it to greater or lesser intensities and directions.

 

“Some conditions, some roads and countries, would require different beams to meet different circumstances, as even in automobiles you use high beams or low beams according to necessity or utility; and in some cases the high beams would not only be ineffective but dangerous, and so low beams are used.

 

“So the whole self turns various portions of its whole consciousness on or off, according to the field [Framework of consciousness] in which the whole self is endeavoring to make contact, manipulations, and according to the field in which he is endeavoring to project himself.

 

“To use full consciousness would be most distracting in many instances. When I speak, therefore, of primary constructions in the physical field [Framework 1], other fields [e.g. probable Framework 1s or nested Frameworks 2, 3, 4] of course have their own primary constructions also, though they would not be composed of matter in your terms [relative to our native Framework 1].

 

“Secondary physical constructions are those created by a consciousness of its conception of other consciousnesses, from data received through telepathy and other means [e.g. five physical senses].

 

“... Consciousness [inner ego] therefore forms the primary construction about itself, not to protect itself from matter but in order to become allied with matter, the consciousness [inner ego] obviously being diffused through the whole physical construction.

 

“… Secondary constructions, being composed of atoms and molecules [body/mind], contain generalized consciousness and innate capsule comprehension [i.e. some type of physical and psychological boundary]. They do not contain the unifying, integrating, organizing, personal direction of a whole self [inner ego].” [23]

 

In other words, the inner ego can never fully manifest within the constraints of a primary much less a secondary construction. However, the inner ego is by definition Some-thing. So it, in turn, is co-created by an energy gestalt, which by definition is Some-Thing that in turn is co-created by All-That-Is, which is No-Thing. Consciousness is not a thing or process, but an “always already” perspective. What we’re really dealing with is a series of nested “levels,” each of which is causal in a relative way. Therefore, each “level” has a relative species of free will, choice, and causality that is very easy to confuse.

 

For example, how many outer egos willfully participate in their birth or death? When does the outer ego actually form and dissipate in relation to birth and death? Doesn’t the outer ego develop through various stages that coincide with body stages of perinatal, infant, child, adolescent, adult, senior, and corpse? Therefore, how primary and causal is the outer ego?

 

When Seth talks about causal consciousness, that doesn’t mean the outer ego is causal in that sense! This is an important distinction to keep in mind. The outer ego does not create the primary construction. It is the primary construction. In other words, the outer ego emerges as a surface structure when the inner ego projects itself into space-time constructions.

 

Thus, the outer ego is always co-created and supported by the inner ego, which in turn is co-created and supported by an energy gestalt, which in turn is co-created and supported by All-That-Is.

 

In this context, then, conscious creation is much more than the thought process, emotions, and expectations of the outer ego alone. There are other supporting, nested psychological structures or aspects that simultaneously co-create within nested Frameworks of consciousness. For example, a four-celled fetus has no capacity for thought, emotions, expectations, etc. in the sense the infant, child, adolescent, or adult do. Therefore, something must be consciously creating at this stage. That something is really Some-thing, our inner ego.

 

Sorry dear outer ego, dear mortal self in time, you are a construction, part of the divine camouflage, maya, or samsara. Our inner ego creates primary constructions, and is purposefully designed to be mostly invisible to the outer ego’s thoughts, emotions, or expectations. The inner ego, in turn, is co-created by an energy gestalt, which in turn is co-created by All-That-Is: Eternal Consciousness, Always Already, No-Thing.

 

Now, don’t worry outer ego, there is a very important role for you! Conscious creation at the outer ego layer consists of secondary constructions – perceptions influenced by our neurochemistry, body/mind, thoughts, belief systems, five physical and nine inner senses, etc. This is where all the fleshy action and secondary constructions are experienced in the world of Framework 1.

 

Even though conscious creation is a nested array of primary and secondary constructions, the outer ego does create. Again, all forms of consciousness create, but in a relative, nested manner that factors in “levels of selfhood” and “levels of reality.”

 

In Part 2, we’ll further explore primary and secondary constructions, primary and secondary experience, and a map called I-I-I.

 

Endnotes