|
Home
Doors
Essays2007
Essays2008
Essays2009
Essays2010
Wisdom
Gallery
Links
Bios
Contact
|
..:: The Mental
Field II ::..
“Boundaries”
By
Alan Schneider
The various estates of the Mental Field
appear to be more or less discreet, that is, bounded, from each
other. This phenomenon is clearly evident on what has been described as
the Physical Plane of Manifestation in previous
essays. When experiencing physical sensory perception, we find our
consciousness surrounded by an ongoing cavalcade of perceived objects
and processes apparently interrelated to each other in relatively
predictable ways. The Physical Plane is clearly a region of dense form
(and forms) that includes as its central feature the body, human
and otherwise. We can perceive the bodies of other beings and creatures,
but we personally experience our own bodies and physical
sensations. The body is the anchor of experience on the Physical Plane,
holding us in place in a fixed manner in life for the duration. Yet,
persistent as it seems to be, the body is still just another,
particularly sharply bounded aspect of the Mental Field. This
sharp boundary is the result of the physical senses interacting with
those external circumstances of perception known as the physical
environment. This environment extends from the body itself to the
far reaches of the physical universe, but, like the body, it remains
solely another collection of perceptual elements in the Mental Field.
One of the more important
processes in the physical environment is evolution. This process
applies to more than the progressive development of species – it
includes the development of all other processes in the universe. Whether
we accept the Theory of Intelligent Creation or not, the universe is
clearly unfolding within deterministic parameters that are controlled by
physical rules of interaction. In this sense, the Sun and solar system
are evolving, as is the Milky Way galaxy, and the interstellar
constellations. The Earth is evolving as well – undergoing specific
physical and chemical transitions as it passes through time. And, even
though we are currently located at the very beginning of this process
from the perspective of universal history, there is every reason to
suppose that human consciousness is evolving, too. This generates
a paradoxical situation in which how we perceive and experience
within the Mental Field appears to simultaneously be emerging
from a non-experienced state, and to be an absolute condition
that simply exists as it is with no apparent origin. Our consciousness
has been described as “a mutation from zero to everything”, a mutation
that appeared quite abruptly with the dawn of tool use in distant
prehistory. The “tools” in question may have been no more than rocks to
be thrown at targets of interest, but the interaction among the tool,
the user, and the target became manifest, and our consciousness became
manifest along with it.
In the individual case, the
emergent human consciousness and the Mental Field also seems to be
related to the emergence of subject-object perception. The first
differentiation of the Primal OM vibration into an object of interest
and an interested observer demarcates the appearance of the ego and
primitive self-perception in consciousness. However much logic dictates
that the infant physical body must presuppose the emergence of this
conscious self-perception, we do not perceive this logical relationship
– we perceive our first instant of differentiated self-awareness
and experience. As I have said, I do not have my awareness, I
am my awareness.
Beyond the Physical Plane of
Manifestation and the sensory experience that creates and sustains our
material impressions of the world and universe, there is a sequence of
many additional mental states arranged in an apparent hierarchy of
levels and interactive relationships. Probably the next sector of
bounded experience is that of emotionally linked behavioral drive
states. These are also quite physical in nature, rooted in the body, and
intimately related to the processes of evolution and the survival of our
species. There are arguably only a very few basic emotional states –
fear, rage, grief, joy, and curiosity would possibly be included among
these, although there is much disagreement in the professional community
of behavioral “authorities” about the extent of this list, and the
cultural processes that then differentiate the basic physiological
emotional responses into acculturated motifs. No one doubts, however,
that we experience emotions, and that they are powerful motivators of
perception and behavior.
Related to the emotions, but
still perceptually separate from them, are the equally physically
grounded instinctual drive states. These emerge in the Mental Field as
cravings for a variety of experiences. Probably the most
immediate craving is the physiological need for oxygen and breathing,
which must be satisfied continually as long as we live. We must drink
liquids daily, become very uncomfortable after even one day without
food, suffer from exposure within a few days if we have no shelter, and
are frustrated if we cannot obtain sexual gratification for prolonged
intervals. And the emotions and the physical drive states are
interactive, but this interaction is heavily influenced by
acculturation, and its natural extent and character is suspect for that
reason.
This brings us to the focal
process of perception – acculturation. As we grow and develop
from infancy to adulthood, we are exposed to an increasingly complex
series of associative mental links through cultural reinforcement that
builds on the basic instincts and emotions to produce the ego and the
total personality. Very little is unaffected by the acculturation
process – our preferences, attitudes, beliefs, morals, external
behaviors, refined emotional states (love, compassion, humor, hatred,
resentment), and inhibitions are all determined by cultural
conditioning. Most of the time most of this is at least subject
to conscious processing – if I stop to consider my situation, I can
actively recall the information about what I believe and esteem,
even if I cannot recall how I came to believe and esteem. The
roots of the acculturation process are frequently lost in personal
history and childhood, and may very well be accompanied by fear and
repression linked to violent negative conditioning possibly used to
produce that acculturation. In all probability, this process accounts
for the great bulk of human behavior through the rubric of social
behavior, even including the creation of the ego. Deepak Chopra has
called the ego “a social fiction”, and there is much evidence to support
this view.
The incidence of repression
in social behavior brings us to consideration of the vast region of the
Mental Field known as the unconscious or subconscious mind. In most
individuals, this region accounts by default for the majority of mental
activity. It amounts to much more than the simple neuroses and
psychoses associated with repression – these are just the local,
individual unconscious areas surrounding the conscious mind. Beyond this
region, which is itself a boundary layer in the Mental Field, there
exists an enormous area of more or less collective expression that has
been assortedly called the Racial Memory, Group Mind, and Collective
Unconscious. Located in this region are the major and minor Archetypal
symbols, once again arranged in a hierarchy of influence in the Psyche,
Freud’s term for what I have called here the Mental Field, and spiritual
theory has termed the Soul.
As we move beyond the
well-defined area of conscious awareness, the activities of the Mental
Field become increasingly obscure, as do the boundaries that separate
them. The Archetypes, the root processes that generate the archetypal
symbols, are probably distinct, but lie beyond the threshold of
observation – so this probability cannot be directly supported by
evidence. The archetypal symbols themselves tend to emerge in
acculturated formats, and are certainly distinct images of many
varieties – the Warrior, the Seer, the King, the Mendicant, the Seeker –
all are independent modes of expression that interact to subconsciously
influence conscious perception of objects and events on the Physical
Plane and beyond.
The archetypal symbols are
elements of the Mental Field that belong to what the Western Mystery
Theories refer to as the Astral Plane of Manifestation. This
Plane represents the first interpretive layer beyond simple physical
interaction, and, although it is very turbulent, a boundary condition
definitely exists here. This boundary can probably be best experienced
through meditation, in which we induce a state of mental relaxation,
thereby calming the turbulent perception induced by the ego and its
incessant chatter in the Mental Field. The boundary can actually be
experienced as perception shifts from the external world of physical
experience to the internal world of mental experience. As is typical of
the Mental Field, however, the boundaries rapidly become more tenuous
the further in we travel – the archetypal symbols tend to emerge into
conscious perception either individually, or in very limited interaction
with each other (as in dreams and fantasies), or (on rare occasions) in
what Jung called a “Big Dream” – a lengthy interactive manifestation of
archetypal symbolic themes that define the individual’s life
processes.
There is much divergence of
opinion with regard to the Mental Field hierarchy beyond the Astral
level, probably due to the difficulty of conducting clear observations
of the internal state. Western Theory holds that there is effectively a
separate “body” for not only the Astral state, but the presumed Mental
state at the next level, called the Astral and Mental bodies,
respectively. The Mental state or Plane, as it is called, is presumed to
be concerned with social attitudes, ideas, and psychic perception,
things which I have assigned to acculturation here. I have also
commented that the archetypal symbols are influenced by acculturation,
and equated them with the Astral Plane, so Mental Plane phenomena
associated with attitudes, ideas, and psychic perception might just as
well be considered as acculturated too, albeit on a higher, more
refined, level of manifestation.
As we tend to move deeper
into the Psyche (or Mental Field) we also move into a realm of more
relatively major archetypal symbols and symbolic expressions. At some
point, at the very deepest level, we encounter what can be called God
archetypes – Divine images at or near the absolute foundation of
consciousness. In terms of the Mental Field, these are expressions of
the Primal OM resonating in the Mind as the First Vibration of
consciousness. This is the Primal Light at the core of all Being and
knowing – the pre-differentiated Light from which we all emerge with the
appearance of the ego and first self knowledge, and to which we all
return when that ego dissolves in death. The Divine archetypal symbols
determine our root feelings and perceptions about life, death, and
manifestation on all the previous Planes, regardless of what theoretical
system one uses to classify experience.
In this sense, the God
Archetypes are Primary Manifestations beyond which nothing else can be
experienced. However, if we observe our perceptions carefully enough, an
interesting discovery is made – another phase of something exists
beyond even the God expression in consciousness – a threshold beyond
description, but not beyond experience – the Pure non-dual Awareness of
Oneness. At this level, subject and object merge into a single
phenomenon in a stream of consciousness that just is. This level
is very important, because all creativity, all new expression, emerges
from the unknowable on the other side of the Planes of Manifestation.
Buddhism calls this place Nirvana, and the experience of contacting it
Satori. For the Buddhist, the highest state of awareness is no
awareness – being in not being and not being in being.
Is there a boundary layer at
Nirvana? In a sense, there definitely is – one where we pass from
everything back to zero again! This is a pure existential boundary, a
boundary where existence becomes active nonexistence, a fertile void
that is pregnant with all of the possibilities of creation in
pre-actualized form.
I have tried to give some
idea of the topography, the relational characteristics and connections,
the interactive form, of the Mental Field in this article. All of
the major classification systems in the Mystery Studies attempt this
task with significant measures of success, and all remain flawed, both
Eastern and Western, because they are interpretive – the Tree of Life is
an intellectualization, the Chakras are implicitly judgmental, the Blood
of Christ is an abstraction, the Dao is indistinct, the Jungian Sphere
cannot portray the Void. Perhaps the final answer to riddle of existence
is the riddle of non-existence. Perhaps the Mental Field exists as
estates of consciousness because this is as close as we have come to
demonstrating a truly integrated Psyche – regions of influence separated
by conceptual boundaries that we assemble into a patchwork identity
because, in the final analysis, we do not really exist.
- With Love, Alan -
(CR2008, Alan Schneider)
Return to Top
|