Love. Energy. Promises.

Q: My partner and I recently had a different perspective on the issue of keeping one’s word and honoring how one feels. I had promised to do something with him, but when the time came I felt I really didn’t have the energy. So I changed my mind, and did something else. I decided to honor myself instead of keeping a promise. I don’t think honoring myself is the same as being selfish.

As I see it, love begins by honoring yourself. Energy is transient. Honoring thyself means honoring that energy. It doesn’t override a promise that’s made to a loved one. It means honor your energy. This is one of the truisms of life: Energy is transient! What do you think?

CdeQ: Yes, indeed, energy is transient. That’s its nature. It flows, and comes and goes. And since feelings and emotions are forms of energy, they are also transitory.

Feelings come and go like the breeze, and we have very little control over them. We can choose to attend to them, to ignore them, or to resist them when they arise, but we have very little (if any) control over when or whether they arise. Feelings blow through us like wind over the ocean. And we can let them toss us about like boats on the waves, or we can exercise the power of choice to steer our way through the storms of feelings (and energy).

Giving our word is like a rudder on a boat. It  empowers us to navigate our way through the winds and currents of our always-changing emotions, feelings, and thoughts. That way, we are not at the mercy of our ever-shifting states of mind. We honor our feelings by allowing them to be what they are, just as we honor our journey at sea by paying attention to the waves and currents.

Keeping our word does not mean we don’t honor our feelings. We honor them by acknowledging and fully experiencing them as they occur. This does not mean always giving in to how we happen to feel at any particular moment. In fact, I would say “giving in” to our feelings is the exact opposite of “honoring thyself.”

To me, honoring thyself means honoring who we truly are, and who we truly are is created or declared by our word. We create who we are when we declare who we are. In that sense, honoring ourself means honoring our word, our promises. It is the core of our integrity. Integrity is being constant to our word, even in the face of “transient feelings” or “shifts in energy.”

This does not mean, of course, that we are “forced” to keep to our word/promise no matter what happens. We cannot be “victims” of our promises—that would be a contradiction because the spirit of the promise would be gone.

It is always a choice. We become a “victim” to our word only when we give up the power of choice. And we become a “victim” of circumstance when we give up a promise just because we no longer feel like keeping it.

We choose to keep our word, even when our feelings change. Sometimes, circumstances do change in ways that we may need to renegotiate a promise—that’s where communication is so important. Crises do happen beyond our control, and when they do, we may need to choose to cancel the original promise and recreate a new one. This should never be done lightly, and not as a matter of course. This is a far cry from just ignoring a promise because at some future time we may not “feel like it.” If everybody went around doing just what they “felt like” in the moment, the world would quickly collapse into social chaos.

So, rather than always simply acting on what we happen to feel like in the moment, I’m saying that what works is:

* be responsible for your feelings (own them);
* acknowledge your feelings (pay attention to them);
* allow yourself to fully experience your feelings; and
* nevertheless, keep your word.

Keeping our word cannot be dependent on whether we happen to feel like it at some future time. That would not be a promise. It would be a form of deception—because even if we meant it at the time, we also would know that we might cancel the “promise” whenever we felt like it. (Of course, if we let the other person know that our “promise” could be canceled at any time because we might not feel like it, then that would not be deception. However, the other person would know he or she had not received a promise. Just unreliable words.)

Relationships are built on trust. And trust is built on knowing people will keep their word. It is also built on mutual respect and honoring of the other. If circumstances change and keeping a promise would in some way damage or be detrimental to the other, then clearly it would be time to talk about it, and renegotiate. Love is not forcing others to do what is unhealthy, nor is it enabling them to break their word just because they no longer feel like it. Love is supporting others to keep their word while honoring what they are feeling in the moment. Love is accepting times when promises need to be renegotiated.

My bumper-sticker for this is: “Energy is transient. Promises are trustworthy.”

Intention Beyond Belief

Do Our Beliefs Create Reality?

Without a doubt, consciousness plays a decisive role in creating and shaping our world. So, I want to be clear about something: What I am about to say does not diminish or invalidate in any way the insight expressed in phrases such as “belief creates reality” or “we create our own reality.”

The core insight is valid, and I honor it. I think it gives expression to a profound truth. However, I also think it can be misleading if simply taken at face value, without finer discernment. As a philosopher, I like to burrow beneath surfaces to reveal deeper meanings and truths.

I want to draw attention here to the difference between “belief” and “intention.” When I hear people talk about “beliefs creating reality” they usually mean intention co-creates reality. These are two very different claims, with very different—and important—consequences for our lives and for the world we live in.

Yes, many people do believe in the creative power of belief.  I don’t. I have a different view, discussed in my books Radical Knowing and more recently Consciousness from Zombies to Angels. Here’s my take on this issue.

Frozen Fragments of Consciousness

Beliefs are made of thoughts. Thoughts are abstractions—“frozen fragments of consciousness” taken from the moment-to-moment flow of ongoing experience. Because thoughts are abstractions, they are only fragments of reality, echos of expired experiences that have now moved into the past (near or distant). Thoughts are “mental snapshots” of a moment in time. Thoughts and beliefs are rooted in the past.

Experience is always happening now. Reality, too, is always happening now. The “happy coincidence” of experience and reality meeting in the now means that by paying attention to what we are actually experiencing in the present moment, we have direct access to reality, to what is actually happening now.

When we focus on thoughts and beliefs, however, our attention is fixated on residues of expired experiences that belong to the past—not to present reality. We get mesmerized by our intricate tapestries of thoughts (literally “entranced” by them). We then mistake our abstractions (snapshots of the past) for what is real, and we miss out on what is really happening now, in our in-the-moment experience.

Because thoughts are abstractions, they have no real power or potency. And because beliefs are constructed of thoughts, they are essentially impotent, too. Beliefs are “mental habits” and, like all habits, they are mechanical, having no creativity. As “habits of mind,” beliefs are tools of the ego (egos are mental machines).

However, experience is very different. It is naturally and intrinsically creative. Why? Because at every new moment a new experience comes into being. Each experience is literally an act of creation—a gift from the universe. And the wonderful thing is we don’t have to do anything for experiences to happen. They come built into the very fabric of existence itself. To be is to experience. To experience is to be creative.

That’s why I encourage people to focus on being present—bringing awareness and attention to what we are actually experiencing right now, moment-by-moment. That’s where our power lies. That’s the source of our creativity.

When I examine sayings such as “beliefs create reality” I find that what is really being expressed is the insight  “intentions create reality.” That seems to me to be the deeper truth.

Language is critically important, and so I pay close attention to the words we use. I do so not merely as an intellectual exercise (that would be pointless), but because, as I see it, the words we choose do make a real difference in how we live our lives and, therefore, how we impact the world.

I pay particular attention to the distinction between “belief,” “experience,” and “intention” because a great deal of confusion and strife in the world is caused by people holding onto their cherished beliefs at all costs. People die by the thousands, perhaps millions, every year when different belief systems collide. And countless millions of individuals from other species die, too, because of clashing human beliefs.

I sometimes say, only half humorously, that I’ve never met a belief that created anything—except trouble.

Here’s a quick rule of thumb for choosing experience beyond belief: No experience is ever wrong—or even could be wrong. Every experience simply is exactly what it is. However, beliefs can be wrong because they are interpretations (they are stories), and like all interpretations they can miss the mark, be mistaken, or be misunderstood.

Experiences happen in the moment before interpretation kicks in. Every experience reveals a slice of reality for what it truly is at that moment. Here’s what typically happens:

experience —> interpretation —> belief —> dogma —> ideology —> action

Notice that our actions (how we interact with others and the world around us) are many steps removed from the original experience that connects us with reality. Is it any surprise, then, that so many of our actions just add further confusion and disruption to our lives and the environment? For the most part, for most of us, our actions are out of touch with reality.

Much better, then, to learn to act directly from experience. Cultivating this ability is at the core of most (perhaps all) spiritual practices and effective psychological discipline.

experience —> action

Think, for example, about master martial artists or think of great athletes—men and women who achieve exceptional performance because they have learned to act directly from their experience in the moment—not from their beliefs! In the midst of action, they do not stop to think or to make sure they act from their beliefs. If they did, their performance and effectiveness would collapse.

Intention: The Creative Expression of the Soul

So much for “experience beyond belief.” What about “intention”?

Whereas beliefs are habits of mind rooted in the ego, intention is the focused creative expression of the soul’s natural intelligence.

By paying close attention to our experience in the moment, we open up to expressions of intelligence flowing from the soul—from the innermost depths of our being. Intention is choosing to align ourselves with our deepest wisdom. (Actually, it is not really “our” wisdom. Ultimately, it is the collective wisdom of all sentient beings, expressed through us as individuals at a particular point in space and time. But that’s a topic for another discussion.)

Wisdom, then, involves getting the ego out of the way—getting beyond our mental, mechanical habits—and, instead, choosing to allow the soul’s intelligence its full natural expression. “Intelligence seeks expression,” declares Darwin in Deep Spirit. One way or another, intelligence will express itself. We might as well choose to go along for the ride. Why fight or resist the flow of natural intelligence by trying to mold reality to our beliefs, by trying to shape reality to fit in with our mechanical mental habits?

When we consciously choose to align with this deep collective intelligence, we open to the creativity of intention. Creativity flows from intention, from focused natural expression of the soul’s deepest intelligence and wisdom.

Beliefs don’t create reality; they distort it—inevitably. Beliefs distort reality because they are rooted in the past, and reality is always now.

Of course, I don’t want you to believe a word of this. I do, however, want you to pay attention to whatever you experience as you let in the meaning of these words. What are you feeling right now? Guided by that feeling, what do you choose right now? What is your intention beyond belief?

For Earth Day (April 18)

This is my vision for “Future Earth”—a world where humans live in balance with all other species, and give up the dangerous myth that “humans are special.” All species are special (it’s what makes them different species). And there is nothing especially special about human specialness. Only when we let go of that self-serving myth will our planet stand a chance of sustaining the bountiful variety of living systems that Earth has so beautifully created and nourished for the billions of years we have circled around the life-giving light of our Sun. May it long continue. And may we continue to walk the journey of evolution.

Earth Song

For the Love of Matter

Q: I just had a very interesting discussion with my partner on love and the material world. I took the approach that all things have some level of consciousness, but she denies that any material object has consciousness, especially at the level of atoms and molecules. To her, that just seems ridiculous. But isn’t it true that we, the Earth, and the universe are all made up of the same atoms and molecules? Someone who denies that all matter has consciousness cannot show love for material creations. Right?

CdeQ: Well I’m not sure; it depends on what you mean by “love.” Lots of people “love” material possessions, indeed are addicted to them. Yet most of these would also deny that matter has consciousness. Perhaps your friend is someone who “loves” material possessions but doesn’t really love matter because she neither believes nor experiences the deep and innate sentience and sacredness of all matter—whether animals, plants, rocks, or minerals.

People who deny sentience in matter deny that atoms and molecules have any level of consciousness. That is the dominant paradigm of scientific materialism. But, as I point out in my books and lectures, it makes no sense—because it cannot account for the fact that we have consciousness and we are made of atoms and molecules.

If your friend denies that atoms have consciousness, then ask her how come she has consciousness—after all, she is made of atoms. Can she explain how mindless atoms could ever come together to produce her mind? Of course, she cannot. Nobody can. It would require a miracle.

Yes, you are quite right: We humans are made up of atoms and subatomic particles found elsewhere in the natural world. There are no special “human atoms” or “human molecules.”

Bottom line: If we have consciousness (we do) and if we are made of atoms and molecules (we are), then, unless some inexplicable miracle has happened, it follows that the atoms and molecules we are made of must also have some degree of consciousness, too. And, since there is nothing special about human atoms and molecules, if follows that all atoms and molecules must also have some degree of consciousness. The logic is plain and straightforward.

People who deny this either (a) do not think things through clearly enough or (b) believe in some inexplicable miraculous process that can produce minds from mindless matter. (Ironically, this option is not available to materialists because, by definition, they deny the possibility of anything supernatural like miracles.)

Generally, people who deny that matter has its own consciousness have just unthinkingly bought into the dogma of scientific materialism—which is based on the metaphysical assumption that the ultimate nature of reality is “dead” matter. However, that assumption is not in any way scientific or supported by scientific evidence. To put it bluntly: Science has absolutely nothing to say about consciousness one way or the other. Why? Because science restricts itself to studying the physical world, and consciousness is nonphysical.

If your friend is truly interested in clearly thinking things through then you might want to pursue this kind of conversation with her. If, however, she just unthinkingly adopts the “standard dogma,” then I’d say don’t even waste your time.

But be patient and compassionate: People in our culture have been educated (”brainwashed” is appropriate) to believe that only humans (or, at best, animals with complex brains) could possibly have minds or consciousness. There are long and complex reasons for this (I spell them out in Radical Nature). Essentially, it all comes down to the need to believe that humans are special. We’re not. We, like everything else in nature, are composed of matter and mind (or energy and consciousness).

Interestingly enough, people who truly love matter—let’s call them “radical materialists”—tend not to be in love with material consumption. They recognize that all of nature is sacred. Indigenous cultures recognized this a long, long time ago.

Conscious Evolution

The Call of Consciousness

The human family is in the midst of the most significant transformation of consciousness since its emergence in Africa more than one hundred thousand years ago. Consciousness has been evolving for billions of years, from before the first cell to us.

We are becoming aware that through our own consciousness the universe can know itself. This awareness reveals incredible new potential for our individual and collective humanity.

With consciousness comes choice. And with expanding awareness, we can choose to more actively participate in the direction  our evolution takes.

Simultaneously, we are the first species on Earth aware that we can destroy ourselves by our own actions (endangering and extinguishing countless other species along the way). This may be the greatest wake-up call to the evolution of consciousness since the origin of Homo sapiens sapiens.

We now realize we are affecting our own evolution by everything we do. This knowledge awakens in us the aspiration to become more conscious through receptive experiential practices—including meditation, reflection, prayer, and intuition—as well as through active expressions of conscious choice and creativity.

Doing so, we can accelerate our evolution in the direction of unity consciousness, and inspire us to deeply align our collective vision for a more compassionate and replenishing world.

(Adapted from “A Call to Consciousness.” For the full call to action, see below . . .)

‘A Call to Consciousness’ is a collective initiative from leading lights such as: Deepak Chopra, Marianne Williamson, Jean Houston, Barbara Marx-Hubbard, Greg Braden, Debbie Ford, Michael Beckwith, Lynne McTaggart, Joan Borysekno, and Bruce Lipton.

Respond to the Call: Find our more.
Add your name and your voice.

We Are Not Alone

Click for larger image.

Q: What drives collective evolution or evolution of consciousness and culture, and how do we consciously, creatively participate in it? Some of us believe that humans are the living face of evolution today—that we are, in fact, evolution becoming conscious of itself. Through us, evolution is coming to understand its own dynamics and is now poised to use them with intentionality, purpose, and intelligent design.

CdeQ: The phrase “intelligent design” is deliciously appropriate in this context. A deeper understanding of consciousness in evolution can help us in two ways:

First, by showing how consciousness shapes the development of societies and cultures. Second, and much more important, by accepting that consciousness is a decisive influence on the trajectory of species evolution itself.

In my work—especially in Radical Nature and my new book Deep Spirit—I make a strong case that consciousness has always been a factor directing the “adventure of matter” we call “evolution.” Human self-reflexive consciousness is, as you say, “evolution becoming conscious of  itself.”

Since humans are natural products of evolution, then whatever attributes we have (including our self-reflexive consciousness) are  automatically natural expressions of evolution, too. Yes we are a “living face” of evolution today—but we are not alone. We have very good reasons to believe that other species (such as cetaceans and some of the other great apes) also possess forms of self-reflexive consciousness.

The new-found human ability to tinker with genetics, of course, gives us a way to interfere with the process of natural selection that other species don’t possess. However, I think that conscious intention, much more than any DNA “fix,” is what, ultimately,  will guide the future unfolding of evolution. In that case, the human capacity for genetic manipulation pales in comparison to the collective intention at work in all species—not just humans.

As always, I’m interested in shifting our attention (or expanding our attention) from a self-serving, self-absorbed focus on human consciousness or evolution. We share this ecosystem (and consciousness) with a host of other sentient beings, without whom we would not be who we are or be able to survive. The evolution of human culture/society will always take place within a larger context and network of other sentient beings who are also evolving.

Like most indigenous cultures do, we need to see  our species as just one “nation” sharing this beautiful planet and awesome cosmos with  a more-than-human world. 

The “intelligent design” at work in evolution is not something new that came on the scene with human consciousness. It has always been there—in all species, in all matter—as a natural ingredient of the sentient energy that pervades the cosmos, and underlies all of reality.

Creation is at work in evolution—the natural creative capacity that matter/energy itself possesses.

Creation is ongoing, not a one-time event. That’s why I speak of “intelligent evolution” as an alternative to the rather strange debate between proponents of “intelligent design” and neo-Darwinian evolution. Evolution, literally, is the “great story” that intelligent, sentient matter/energy is weaving for itself.

And I delight that you and I—and all our sentient colleagues—are part of this wondrous cosmic evolutionary tale.

Intelligent Evolution

What if both science and religion are wrong about evolution? What if both are right?

We’ve all seen them: bumper stickers and decals of a fish with legs symbolizing Darwin’s theory of evolution. And then, from religious creationists, the “counter-decals” of a fish-with-a-cross swallowing “Darwin’s” amphibious fish. The battle of the decals is just one way the debate between creationists and evolutionists overflows onto our streets.

But there’s an alternative: a philosophy that shows why both religion and science have got it wrong—and right.

To move beyond the sectarian clashes and wars in these troubled times—between fundamentalists in both religion and science—we need a wiser, more coherent, account of who we are and how we came to be. We need a revised and renewed vision of creation and evolution. We need a deeper and broader understanding of both religion and science.

Both Wrong and Right

Religion is wrong to place the “Creator” beyond nature (as supernatural).*

Science is wrong to deny intelligence (consciousness or spirit) at work in evolution.

Religion is right to hold the view that there is creation and that creation possesses intelligence. And religion is right to deny that the birth and evolution of our world happened by chance.

Science is right to hold the view that evolution produces different species, including humans. And science is right to deny that some “supernatural” intelligent designer is responsible for the wondrous diversity and interconnectedness of living and non-living forms.

Best of Both

In the new view, creation is not the result of some “supernatural Creator.” Nor is creation a one-time event. Instead, creation is continuous and natural. Evolution is not random and unfolding without the guidance of a deep intelligence. Nature itself is naturally intelligent and creative. That’s how evolution occurs.

Instead of a “higher” intelligence, let’s be open to a deeper intelligence. Instead of “dead” and “dumb” matter, let’s be open to sentient and intelligent matter.

Then we can have the best of both worlds—integrating the great insights of both religion and science. The “missing link” is consciousness. The ability to have experience, to feel, to be aware is a complete mystery to science. Evolution cannot explain it. Religions take it for granted that this ability is unique to humans (a special gift from the Creator). The fact of consciousness highlights the shortcomings of both science and religion, and it offers a way out of the seemingly endless debate between evolutionists and creationists.

New Worldview

We need a new worldview where religion recognizes that consciousness (intelligence or spirit) is not “supernatural,” but is part of the natural fabric of cosmos, Earth, and life, and where science recognizes that matter itself “tingles with the spark of spirit,” that evolution is guided from within.

This “new” philosophy or worldview is called “panpsychism” or “radical naturalism.” We could also call it “intelligent evolution.” (Actually, it’s a very ancient philosophy, shared by indigenous cultures throughout the world.)

If we shift to such a view, then we can begin to transcend the squabbles between those who believe in supernatural “intelligent design” and those who believe in random evolution.

The biggest challenge facing modern science is to explain the mystery of consciousness. A science based on the assumption of “dead” insentient matter exploding from a random Big Bang cannot account for mind. Yet consciousness is the one thing we can be absolutely certain exists.

The biggest challenge facing mainstream religion is to remain relevant in a world increasingly dominated by scientific knowledge.

The philosophy of intelligent evolution can help science and religion meet these challenges. In a nutshell, it takes us beyond the dogmas of both:

Beyond Religion: The world was not created by a supernatural transcendent God (in seven days or 13.7 billion years).

Beyond Science: The world did not come into being from a random Big Bang followed by billions of years of random chemical and biological evolution.

Instead, the most coherent story about how the world came to be (a world where both matter and mind are real) recognizes that

Spirit is not supernatural (above and beyond nature).

Evolution is not without purpose or intelligence.

The new philosophy offers a way to honor the deep insights of both religion and science.

Intelligent Design

Yes, there is an “intelligent designer” at work in evolution. But the intelligence (call it “God” or “Spirit”) is intrinsic to nature. Nature itself is intelligent (has sentience and consciousness, purpose and meaning) “all the way down” to single cells, molecules, atoms, and subatomic particles.

Evolution

In this new view of nature and evolution, matter itself is intelligent. Matter is “adventurous.” Evolution is the adventure of matter exploring its own creative potentials. As matter evolves, its native intelligence or consciousness evolves, too. So by the time human brains come on the scene, matter or nature has achieved the remarkable ability to be self-reflective—to know that it knows—and to ponder the eternal questions in religion, philosophy, and science: Where did we come from? Who are we? Where are we going? Why is there anything at all?

Intelligent Evolution: A Sacred Fish with Legs?

Instead of the amusing (and silly) bumper-stickers pitching Darwin against Jesus (evolution vs. religion), we can come up with a new set of symbols and sound-bytes:

Picture a decal that shows a fish with legs and a halo, indicating that evolution is a sacred process because spirit is active in the development of species. Evolution is natural and creative. We could say “Spirit Matters” or, just as meaningful, “Matter Spirits.”

* (“Religion,” here, refers to monotheistic doctrines. It does not include other teachings such as Buddhism or Taoism.)

Enter the World of Intelligent Evolution and the Great Adventure of Consciousness in Deep Spirit.

Deep Spirit: Fact or Fiction?

A Personal Revelation

In my new novel Deep Spirit, a wise and highly informed dolphin, called Darwin, communicates with scientists, helping them to “crack the noetic code” — a new way of knowing that could pull humanity back from the brink of chaos. It’s a story about the evolution of consciousness — and how to realize our visions for a viable future.

One of the first people to finish reading Deep Spirit, a woman named Melissa, asked whether I have any evidence for dolphins communicating with humans. “What,” she wondered, “makes you feel it is either plausible or real?”

What an interesting — and challenging — question! I wasn’t quite sure how to respond. But her question was heartfelt, so I wanted to try.

First, I don’t expect readers to accept that communication between species, in human language, is either plausible or real. I simply leave that possibility open. However, I do hope the dialogue makes sense within the story.

That said, the question of “evidence” is complicated, subtle, and complex. One of the key themes in Deep Spirit is the value of cultivating alternative states of consciousness — beyond our everyday rational minds. I don’t expect much, if any, successful interspecies communication, or evolution of human consciousness, can occur without it.

By far the most compelling source of evidence I have for feeling confident that the narrative device of a telepathic dolphin is more than a mere “narrative” or a “device” arises from personal experience. (Here comes the revelation . . .)

An Unexpected Encounter

A few years ago, after I had completed the first draft of Deep Spirit (in a two-week creative burst, more than 400 pages poured out), I participated in a shamanic journey with a bona fide South American shaman. Without going into details, I can report that during a session lasting between 8 to 12 hours, with profound shifts in consciousness, I experienced communicating with a dolphin. (For obvious reasons, as someone who values my role as a philosopher and academic, this is not an experience I have readily shared. But the question posed by Melissa has prompted me to tackle this issue head on. It’s time to take a stand for authenticity and non-ordinary ways of knowing.)

What I discovered during that session has changed my life. “Darwin,” the dolphin character I thought I had created, seems in some inexplicable way very real indeed and exists independently of my invention. In our dialogue, he revealed he was using me — because of  my openness, caring, and compassion for the plight of cetaceans (and other animals) — as a “mouthpiece” for the cause of dolphins and whales. I came away from that session with a strong conviction that rather than being a character I invented, Darwin was working through me to communicate something he and his species wanted humans to know.

"Intelligence seeks expression."

Because it was an alternative state, much of the detail of that session is accessible now only as fragments in my “normal” state of consciousness. However, one point remains crystal clear: Darwin expressed deep grief for the plight of dolphins and whales, a sorrow shared by all of them. It’s not just that humans are hunting and killing these highly intelligent species, or even that we are poisoning their oceans. No, what concerns them most of all is that humans, with very few exceptions, are no longer open or interested in communicating with them.

They need us to connect with them to evolve to the fullest of our collective intelligence. (I’m sure this applies to other species as well — the great apes, elephants, parrots, octopus, and, dare I say it, coral — but that’s another story). In a phrase: Humans are preventing dolphins and whales from being fully who they are, or could be. We are keeping them stuck. We are a drag on evolution. Of course, this deeply impacts our own development, too. We carry the collective grief of alienation deep in our psyches and in the tissues of our bodies.

Now, in my “normal” state of consciousness, I am very aware how “off the chart” this can sound — especially to my colleagues in philosophy and science. I should add that during that session I didn’t actually see Darwin, or even hear him. I felt his presence, and all the meaning of our communication flowed from that. It was palpable, exceptionally clear, vivid, and real far beyond anything I have ever experienced before or since. In that state, this mode of consciousness had the quality of a shallow dream. By comparison, that experience was veridical, deep, and authentic.

Before publishing Deep Spirit, I considered describing my encounter with Darwin in a Foreword, but decided against it. I wanted the story to stand by itself. However, I now see that I need to stand behind the story and its unusual origin because, as Melissa implied, it raises important questions about the nature of knowledge, and the difference between reality and illusion.

Click to see full-size illusion

How Do We Know What is Real?

My shamanic experience does make me think twice about the nature of evidence. Of course, neither what I experienced, nor my report of it, can count as objective evidence that Darwin really exists. However, we cannot simply dismiss it as subjective fantasy, either.

Without exception, every piece of so-called objective evidence must be experienced, first of all, in someone’s subjective mind. All evidence must be experienced by someone. What, then, makes some experiences “real” and others not? Shouldn’t all experiences count as evidence?

What about hallucinations? How are these different from visions? I do think it is useful to be able to tell the difference between a visionary experience of reality and a mere hallucination. Conventionally, hallucinations occur in the privacy of someone’s mind — and only there. We may believe something exists beyond our own experience, when in actual fact it does not — at least, not according to what other people report. Hallucinations are private experiences misinterpreted. By definition, their content has no other existence. But how can we test that? How do we decide which interpretations are likely to match reality?

Well, quite simply, we communicate. We share our stories. We discover what, collectively, we hold in common. We test our stories against shared experience. This is precisely how science works.

However, beyond sharing our stories through the medium of language, we can also share experiences directly — through shared feelings, through engaging each others’ presence in intersubjective communion. In short, telepathically. This, typically, involves alternative states of consciousness. And this is precisely how shamanism works.

Was my conversation with Darwin “real” or a kind of hallucination? Well, at that time, it came with remarkable clarity and conviction. But, right now, I cannot be so sure. One of the most disconcerting, yet liberating, realizations we can have is that the feeling of certainty does not mean something is true. Private conviction is not the same as truth, and does not count as evidence.

On the other hand, just because no-one else witnessed or shared my encounter with Darwin doesn’t mean he isn’t real. Remember this important scientific slogan: “Absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence.”

Ultimately, all we ever have to go on are our own experiences — and it is wise to share and compare them with others’. The best we can do is pay attention as openly, as honestly, and as authentically as we can. And then examine our experiences using the “Four Gifts of Knowing” (senses, reason, feeling, and intuition) to see how they coalesce. Guided by experiences with the greatest clarity and coherence, we arrive at what seems to be the most “likely story” — our best shot at expressing what is real.

If I have learned anything in life it is this: Uncertainty pulses in the heart of every certainty. Beyond the light of knowledge shines the dark luminance of inexhaustible, always beckoning, mystery.

I invite you to read Deep Spirit and discover for yourself the mysterious interplay between reality and dreams — one man’s (or one dolphin’s) “best shot” at the power of story to transform the world and create a brighter future.

Intelligence seeks expression.
Expressing it is wisdom.

The Ultimate Message

Praise for Deep Spirit

“Fact or fiction? Deep Spirit is an ingenious and imaginative story about the evolution of consciousness, alien intelligence, and the transformative power of dreams. It explores ultimate questions about life and death, and takes you on a roller-coaster ride through the mysteries of science and spirituality—guided by a truly believable shamanic dolphin. Whether you’re a scientist or mystic, a lover of quiet wisdom or action and suspense, Christian de Quincey’s visionary tale will take you into realms beyond imagination. Fast-paced and easy to read, this is a book to take to the beach, to read on the train or plane, to curl up with in bed. Pick it up, and you won’t put it down. Rich with images and characters that leap off the page, I can easily see Deep Spirit transformed into Spiritual Cinema. 
But don’t wait for the movie—read the book first.”

—Stephen Simon, 
Producer Somewhere in Time,
What Dreams May Come, and Indigo
Co-founder www.spiritualcinemacircle.com

“Deep Spirit breaks new ground in the genre of “visionary faction.” It’s the first book to cross sophisticated mainstream adventure story with new age wisdom. Few other books, fiction or nonfiction, have so successfully popularized a thoughtful blending of modern science, shamanic wisdom, mind-body philosophy, and mystical experience. One thing is certain: The conventional scientific view of consciousness is pitifully limited. Deep Spirit is a fabulous way of using the power of story to reveal new ideas about the origins, destiny, and reach of the mind.”

—Larry Dossey, MD, 
author of The Extraordinary Healing Power of Ordinary Things

“Deep Spirit is far more than fiction. It is a call for a higher consciousness, and ends with one of the most lucid descriptions of unity consciousness I have read for a long time. Deep Spirit is the thinking person’s Celestine Prophecy. Christian de Quincey writes with an easy style; and his insights are both grounded in science and reflect the perennial philosophy of mystics from time immemorial.”

—Peter Russell, author of From Science to God, and The Global Brain

Click here to post your comment on Amazon.com

or to order a copy of Deep Spirit

Click for Sample Chapters

Defining Consciousness

* * *

Q: The real challenge is to define consciousness. In The Emperor’s New Mind, physicist Roger Penrose makes a good effort at describing what it is not. How, I wonder, do you define what it is?

* * *

CdeQ: As far as I know, I have never defined “consciousness.” Instead, I prefer to clarify what I mean. I make a clear and (to me) important distinction between a meaning and a definition of consciousness.

“Meaning” refers to how the word is actually used. Different people may (and do) use the word “consciousness” to mean different things. A “definition,” by contrast, is usually understood to be the correct meaning of the word (typically, as explained in a dictionary).

Meanings are subjective; definitions are (or are assumed to be) objective. So, what matters to me is not the “definition” of consciousness (something written “in stone”), but how people actually use the word. It doesn’t really matter which meaning we use, as long as we make it as clear as we can what we mean. We don’t even have to agree on the same meaning to understand each other.

So, in my work I’m quite clear what I mean when I use the term: Consciousness is the ability or capacity to know, be aware of, to feel. It means subjectivity, sentience, experience—plus the ability to choose. All of these are non-physical aspects of reality.

In brief: Consciousness is the intrinsic ability of matter/energy to feel, know, and purposefully direct itself.

Consciousness feels out possibilities, makes a choice, and manifests something actual (i.e., it literally in-forms and shapes reality).

Whenever you make a choice you are feeling/knowing the possibilities that surround you, and purposefully directing your energy to achieve some aim.

Consciousness, as choice, is the expression of intention through energy. It collapses possibilities into manifest actuality.

That’s what we mean when we say “consciousness is creative.” It truly is—as quantum physicists and enlightened mystics know very well.

Here’s a scientific blessing:

“May you always collapse your wave function (your possibilities) to manifest your highest aim.”

Find out more in Consciousness from Zombies to Angels.

Can Intention Change the World?

Q: In Consciousness from Zombies to Angels you say that consciousness does not cause actions. But in Radical Knowing, you say that intention is “consciousness thrown out from the self . . . to cause some change.”

Are these two statements contradictory or am I missing something? Experiments described in Lynne McTaggart’s The Intention Experiment show that human intentions can change the acidity of water, and thereby affect the growth of plants.

I understand the idea that consciousness cannot cause action because it’s not an energy and has no location. But then I don’t understand what you say about it in Radical Knowing or the intention experiments described by McTaggart. Can you clarify what seems to be a contradiction: on one hand, consciousness cannot cause action and, on the other, intention can cause change?

CdeQ: Thanks for this insightful question about consciousness and action. I can understand your confusion, and I realize I need to be clearer on the subtleties involved.

So, let me try to clarify:

By itself, consciousness—as awareness and choice—is not sufficient to cause anything to happen in the physical world. Actual events also need energy. So, creating an intention (in consciousness) is not enough to make things happen.

However (according to the philosophy of panpsychism), energy and consciousness always go together. Consciousness is intrinsic to energy—i.e., energy always possesses some degree of internal awareness plus an innate ability to choose between possibilities.

In my books, I have described consciousness as “the innate ability of matter/energy to know, feel, and purposefully direct itself.” Consciousness, therefore, gives purposeful direction to the flow of energy. You could say that action is energy moving itself from within. This ability for self-directed motion (involving awareness and choice) is the consciousness “within” (intrinsic to) matter/energy.

In Consciousness from Zombies to Angels, I distinguish between consciousness per se (as merely awareness and choice) and consciousness embodied in energy. I am saying that consciousness alone cannot make things happen in the physical world. However, when embodied in energy (which, in actual fact, it always is) consciousness (intentionality) can and does cause action and changes the physical world.

That’s what I had in mind in Radical Knowing. When I described intention as “consciousness thrown out from the self  . . . to cause some change” I was thinking of “consciousness as the intrinsic ability of matter/energy to know and direct itself from within.” Intention, then, moves energy from within by purposefully directing it toward the realization of some possibility.

By itself, however, intention/consciousness could not cause any change. It needs to act from “within” energy. In the actual world, there is no free-floating, disembodied intention or consciousness (energy and consciousness always go together). Therefore, every intention is always the expression of purpose through some change in energy.

That’s why intentions have causal potency. It’s why intention can cause changes in water. In those experiments, human intentions were expressed and shared by the consciousness in the water molecules, which then responded by redirecting the energy of the water, changing its pH or acidity level.

Bottom line: Intention is consciousness focused and directed with purpose. But for action to happen—for anything to manifest—something else besides conscious intention is required. And that “something else” is energy—which comes with consciousness “built-in.” That’s how intention-within-energy causes change and action in the physical world. Mind moves matter from within.

I hope this helps clear up the confusion.

Consciousness: It’s Not the ‘Vibes’

Q: When talking about “energy healing,” you say that consciousness does not “travel” because it does not exist in “space.” I agree. But you fall short of saying that consciousness is all that is. Doesn’t healing happen when we we bring another into our field of conscious awareness as if they are part of us? intenti

I don’t think healing is about meaning—which implies conscious intention or participation. Even though I accept that intention is very important, I also feel that someone like Jesus cured without any intention or meaning. He was just vibrating so high that people’s energy field changed frequency. I have met teachers like this. They are so high frequency that they alter reality for others. I recommend the books by Itzhak  Bentov about this.

CdeQ: You have made some very interesting points here that I want to address. First, while I acknowledge it is a widely held belief, I do not agree that “consciousness is all.” I hold that both consciousness and energy are real, and that they always go together (see Radical Nature). Consciousness is the ability to know (to be aware) and to choose (to create intentions). But it is not enough just to “know” or to have “intentions.” We also need to act in order to manifest or realize intentions (this applies to God or the Creative Ultimate, too). And action is energy. Without action or energy, nothing would ever happen despite the best intentions.

So we (the universe) need both. We need consciousness to know and to choose, and we need the embodiment of energy to make things happen.

I’m inviting you (all of us) to pay closer attention to language, and to see if the words we use actually express what it is we wish to communicate. For example, you talk of healing as bringing others into our “field of conscious awareness as if they are part of us.” While I agree with the general idea, I think using the word “field” is misleading. Fields exist in and are spread out through space. Fields are made of energy, not consciousness. Consciousness is what knows (or is aware of) fields of energy, and consciousness chooses to direct the flow of energy.

When you talk of healing as “fields” or “vibrations” you are using “energy talk,” which is appropriate for physics, but not for consciousness. Consciousness doesn’t “vibrate,” because in order to vibrate something needs to exist in space—like a field. (Vibrations are movements in space.) But consciousness does not exist in space. It is non-located.

High Vibrations

Your point about Jesus is interesting, too. Yes, it is quite plausible that Jesus healed (at least sometimes) without any specific intention—because, as you say, “he was just vibrating so high that people’s energy field changed frequency.” That, indeed, would be a good example of “energy healing”—where Jesus’ body (his subtle energy) was vibrating at a high frequency.

However, keep in mind: (a) It is quite likely that the frequency level of a person’s body is in response to the state of consciousness of that person. And (b) even if energy healing through vibrational resonance is happening, it would not account for instantaneous distant healing—which is what this blog is discussing. I do think that the effective component in distant healing is meaning (i.e., participatory shared experience).

Distant healing (sometimes referred to as “non-local” healing) cannot be explained as a transmission of energy—no matter how high the vibration. My good friend Dr. Larry Dossey has made the same point. As I noted in my blog: When distant healing is involved, something else is going on besides energy exchanges.

And that “something else,” I’m saying, is consciousness. It’s a sharing of meaning, not mechanism (transmission of energy through space).

When you say you have met people with “high frequency” or “high vibration,” you are using energy talk. This is fine if you are referring to their bodies. But if you use the same language to refer to a person’s consciousness, that’s “physics envy.” You would be using the language of physics to talk about something that is not physical (i.e., consciousness).

I suspect what you really mean is that you have met people whose presence is charismatic, peaceful, and healing. I have, too. Given a higher state of consciousness, it is quite possible that their bodies also emanate or radiate some kind of higher vibrational energy. But let’s not confuse higher vibrations of energy (bodies) with higher states of consciousness. When distant healing occurs instantaneously, we know that nothing “vibrational” is responsible because the fastest anything can travel through space is the speed of light. But, as I have explained, distance is irrelevant to consciousness. People separated by continents (even by galaxies), however, could instantly participate in sharing the same meaning “heal” or “be whole.”

I’m very familiar with Itzhak Bentov’s books (and have enjoyed them very much). However, he too uses energy talk to describe consciousness. Only physical objects (energy) vibrate; and consciousness is not a physical object. I’m inviting us to get beyond the “physics envy” of energy talk, and instead use the already very rich vocabulary we have for “mind talk.” I know this is a stretch for some (perhaps many) people—our culture has so conditioned us to treat the physical world as the only real world.

As a result, people who know that consciousness is real and potent look for ways to talk about it that “sound” scientific, and they default to energy talk. But my point is: We don’t have to default to energy talk. We can give up “physics envy” and instead honor consciousness for what it is—a reality beyond physics.

No amount of vibrations can account for the fact that sentient beings exist that know and can choose. By themselves, vibrations or frequencies are just measures of physical movements. But consciousness is not physical and cannot be measured. It has a completely different kind of existence from objects that exist in space—no matter how high they vibrate. Consciousness is the subject that knows and chooses—subjectivity is the key characteristic of consciousness. If you are interested, you will find a detailed discussion in my books Radical Nature and Radical Knowing, as well as in my new book Consciousness from Zombies to Angels.

Consciousness from Zombies to Angels

An Interview with Christian de Quincey

Q: What will people learn from your new book Consciousness from Zombies to Angels?

CdeQ: Readers will join me on the greatest adventure of all: an exploration of philosophy’s hardest problem, science’s final frontier, and spirituality’s deepest mystery. They will find seven simple steps on the path to knowing who they truly are.

I’m a professor of Consciousness Studies at John F. Kennedy University and Dean of Consciousness Studies at the University of Philosophical Research. I’ve been teaching and writing about consciousness for decades. It’s my life-long passion.

I wanted to create a comprehensive, easy-to-understand “user’s guide” to to the mind—exploring the full spectrum of consciousness from philosophy through science to spirituality. This book is based on presentations and handouts I created over the years for my students to inform and inspire them about the nature and possibilities of our most intimate reality—consciousness.

Q: How did you come up with the title?

CdeQ: Originally, I wanted to write a kind of Consciousness for Dummies book—like Meditation for Dummies, Yoga for Dummies, Philosophy for Dummies, etc. But I wanted to call it Consciousness for Zombies. You see, in philosophy, a “zombie” is a very special kind of creature: It is just like a human in every way, except it has no mind or consciousness whatsoever. Then (after prompting from my publisher), I realized that probably only philosophers would get the pun. So I went to Plan B.

The subtitle of the book is The Shadow and the Light of Knowing Who You Are. It means that if we are really serious about exploring consciousness we must be willing to work with our own shadow and light. Everyone has a “Shadow”—those negative aspects of ourselves (our fears, guilt, shame, anger) that we have pushed down into our unconscious from early childhood. But whatever we suppress remains in us and we either project it onto others or it erupts in some kind of mind-body illness.

And we not only suppress our “miserable” selves, we also suppress our “magnificent” selves—those parts of us that are creative, powerful, compassionate, and loving. To really know who we are, and to grow as healthy spiritual beings, we need to embrace both our Shadow and our Light. As Joni Mitchell said: “If you get rid of the demons and the disturbing things, then the angels fly off, too.”

We need to embrace our inner “zombies” as well as our inner “angels.” And so: Consciousness from Zombies to Angels. It’s a “user’s guide” to the mind from “Z” to “A.” To make the most effective use of this guide, we need to use our four gifts of knowing.

Q: What are the ‘Four Gifts of Knowing’?

CdeQ: Each of us has many different ways of knowing, with the potential to be a philosopher, a scientist, a shaman, and a mystic. It all depends on where we focus attention and what gifts we decide to cultivate.

The Scientist’s Gift is our senses—and a method for testing our assumptions and beliefs through the power of rigorous observation; we use this gift to explore the world of matter, including our bodies.

The Philosopher’s Gift is reason and language; we use this gift to explore the realm of mind.

The Shaman’s Gift is feeling and alternative states of consciousness; we use this to explore the domain of soul.

The Mystic’s Gift is intuition and sacred silence; we use this to unite with the essence of spirit.

If we wish to truly understand consciousness, we need to cultivate and integrate all our “gifts of knowing.” It’s not enough to just study the brain using the Scientist’s Gift (though that is valuable, too). And using just the Philosopher’s Gift of reason, logic, and language gives us only intellectual knowledge about the mind (also useful if we want to talk or write about consciousness). However, it cannot bring us to the heart of consciousness itself which is experience. For that, we need to also cultivate deep awareness of feeling and intuition (the Shaman’s and Mystic’s Gifts).

We need these last two gifts to develop and evolve consciousness. No amount of information about how the brain works or intellectual knowledge of the mind will ever lead us to transformation. We need to be willing to be open to the full spectrum of consciousness—including our shadow and light, our inner zombies and angels. And to do so effectively, we need to engage in some form of psycho-spiritual practice.

It seems to me that the essence and aim of all spiritual practice is to help us cultivate what I call “experience beyond belief.”

Q: What do you mean by ‘experience beyond belief’?

CdeQ: These days, it’s quite common to hear people say, “you create your own reality” or “reality is whatever you believe.” The idea is that we can create or change the world simply by changing what we think or believe.

That seems to me to be a big mistake. Yes, indeed, consciousness does play a role in shaping the physical world. But be careful. The truth is not so simple—or as simplistic—as the popular cliché would have us believe. It is based on a confusion between “belief” and “intention.” Beliefs are mental habits that block our creative power. Intentions, however, are creative and have power to change lives. They are purposeful, focused expressions of consciousness through choice.

Beliefs, on the other hand, are frozen fragments of consciousness, static snapshots of reality. It works like this: first, at every moment, we are having an experience. Then, we interpret our experience using thoughts (words and ideas). But every thought is an abstraction, literally plucked from the ongoing stream of experience. Next, we solidify our thoughts by turning them into beliefs. We assume that what we think is true (that’s a definition of “belief” ). But we don’t stop there. We often go a step further and turn our beliefs into dogma by believing our beliefs. We insist that our beliefs equal reality (that’s the definition of dogma).

The problem is we then act based on what we believe. But, as everyone knows, a belief can be right or wrong. For example, some people believe that God exists, some people don’t. Who’s right? They can’t all be right, because those beliefs cancel each other out. And if beliefs really did create reality, then here’s what would happen: When people believe in God, God would exist, and when people don’t believe, God would not exist. So, God would be popping in and out of existence on the whims of what human beings believed. What a strange Supreme Being that would be!

It’s important to remember that any belief can be right or wrong (it may more or less accurately match reality or it may totally miss the mark).

However, an experience can never be wrong. Every experience always is exactly what it is. You can never have a “mistaken” experience. You can be mistaken only about your interpretation (thought or belief) of your experience.

Therefore, since beliefs run the risk of being wrong, and experience is never wrong, it makes far more sense to pay attention to your experience than to act on your beliefs. I’m saying that the goal of every spiritual practice is to eliminate the “middle man” of interpretation and belief, and to act directly from experience.

Here’s what typically happens:

experience —> interpretation —>  belief —> dogma —>  action

By contrast, when we cultivate “experience beyond belief” we become like martial artists, great athletes, or creative artists who act in the moment based on what they actually experience.

Have you ever noticed that consciousness or experience always happens right now. And, have you noticed when reality happens? Like experience, reality also happens right now. That’s very convenient. It means that our experience connects us directly with reality.

However, our thoughts and beliefs always distort reality in some way. They remove us from the in-the-moment experience where we connect directly with what is. That’s why I encourage us to cultivate experience beyond belief. And to learn to act directly from experience:

experience —>  action

Q: Are you saying we should give up all our beliefs’?

CdeQ: Not at all. We can’t help having beliefs (it’s what our minds have evolved to do, and they do that job very well). But we can choose whether or not to be attached to our beliefs. We can choose whether or not we believe our beliefs to be true. I’m encouraging us not to believe our beliefs. Rather, I suggest that we learn to notice them, and then release them, let them go.

Wisdom resides in our moment-to-moment experience, not in what we believe. As habits of mind, beliefs are conditioned by the past. Experience, on the other hand, always occurs in the present moment—now.

Of course, I don’t want you to believe what I’m saying, either. I do, however, want you to listen with an open mind, and to allow yourself to feel and experience whatever comes up for you as you respond to the meaning of my words. Pay attention to what you are feeling—to the sensations rippling through your body. That’s the source of your wisdom. Not your abstract thoughts.

As long as we have bodies, we will have ego-minds, and as long as we have ego-minds we will have beliefs. We don’t have much, if any, choice about that. But we do have a choice whether or not to believe our beliefs.

I often remind students of Plato’s final words. On his deathbed, the great philosopher gathered his followers around him and told them that everything he had taught and written was nothing more than a “likely story.”

That’s how we should hold our beliefs—lightly, as “likely stories.”

Q: You talk about going beyond ‘physics envy.’ What do you mean?

CdeQ: Many people use “energy talk” to describe consciousness or spirit. They use words such as “energy,” “vibrations,” “frequency,” “resonance,” “waves,” “fields,” “mechanism,” and a current favorite, “nonlocal.” All of these words are borrowed from physics. They describe what goes on in the physical world.

But mind or consciousness is not part of the physical world. It is non-physical. In my work, and particularly in Consciousness from Zombies to Angels, I encourage people to “watch their language” when talking about consciousness. I point out that using “energy talk” misses the most important point about consciousness—namely it is subjective. Everything in physics, and all the terms borrowed from physics, refer to objects, to things in the objective world.

Consciousness is not an object, it is not objective. It is the subject of experience. It is awareness and choice. It cannot be detected by physical senses or instruments, and cannot be measured. Therefore, it makes no sense to use the language of physics to describe what cannot be physically measured.

Nevertheless, people tend to cling to “energy talk”—because, paradoxically, they think it makes what they say sound more “scientific” or more “grounded.” Actually, the opposite is true. The language of physics is the language of abstractions. If we want to be truly “grounded” then we should ground what we say in what we actually experience—and use “mind talk” instead of “energy talk.” We should not confuse the experiencer (consciousness) with what is experienced (energy).

Frequently, when I make this point, someone says: “But if we give up energy talk then we would have to invent a new language.” This surprises me. I point out that, in fact, we already have a very rich vocabulary for talking about consciousness—words such as “intention,” “attention,” “purpose,” “meaning,” “perceiving,” “observing,” “remembering,” “wanting,” “anticipating,” “believing,” “doubting,” “affirming,” “denying,” “imagining,” “judging,” “understanding,” “feeling,” “experience,” “choice”  . . . and on and on. None of these words can be reduced to “energy talk” or be explained by physics.

Consciousness has its own very appropriate language. I’m suggesting that if we want to push beyond the final frontier, then we will make much better progress if we “watch our language” and use “mind talk” instead of “energy talk.”

Q: Your book has four parts. Can you summarize the key points?

CdeQ: In Part 1, we begin with the Philosopher’s Gift to explore: What is consciousness? I focus on the three core problems in philosophy of mind:

(1) Mind-body connection: How are mind and body related—does the brain produce mind, or does consciousness create the brain; do they exist in parallel universes or does consciousness “go all the way down”?

(2) Other minds: How can we tell if anyone else has consciousness—or even if rocks can feel anything?

(3) Free will: Do we really have choice, or is everything determined by God, by genes, or by physics?

In Part 2, we then shift to the Scientist’s Gift to explore: How the brain works and how consciousness is related to quantum physics.

We enter the curious wonderland of the quantum to see how its strange inhabitants may give us insights into the origins and nature of consciousness. If you ever wondered what a quantum is, what “nonlocality” really means, or why quantum physics might be relevant to consciousness, you will find easy-to-grasp keys to this fascinating domain.

I also show why recent advances in neuroscience and brain imaging that claim to “photograph God” are highly misleading. Yes, it is useful to know what goes on in the brain when someone is having a mystical experience, but no scientific instruments can probe or capture what goes on in an experience. Information about the brain is not the same as information about consciousness. Brain is not mind, and brain science is not consciousness science.

For that, we need a very different kind of science, with a very different approach. Instead of standard Plate-Glass science, which separates subject from object, we need a new “Looking-Glass” science, where there is no separation. In true consciousness science, the mind is exploring itself.

And once we turn the beam of inquiry back on itself—when awareness is focused on itself—we must be open to whatever bubbles up in consciousness. We must be willing to engage with our Shadow, with all the fears, and shame, and anger hiding out in our unconscious mind. In short, a consciousness scientist must be willing to undergo psycho-spiritual transformation.

Only when we open up to our inner “zombies” and “angels,” can we move forward on the path to enlightenment.

Then, in Part 3, we focus on the Shaman’s Gift and Mystic’s Gift and explore: Why consciousness is important. We learn how our minds fall into different patterns, or grooves of thought, and how to shift out of the habits that keep us stuck.

We learn how to recognize “strange attractors” that pull our minds this way and that. We learn how the ego is formed, how it grows into our personality, and becomes embodied. We also learn how to transcend these restrictions through creative acts of choice and letting go to realize our full potential.

Besides learning to recognize our patterns, the Mystic’s Gift takes us into the realm of scared silence, rooted in experience beyond belief. It helps us to accept all of who we are—our ego, our personality, our shadow, our light, our zombies and angels. We discover what it means to “Know Thyself” by following the seven steps to knowing who you really are.

Finally, in Part 4, we shift to “Consciousness in Dialogue.” One of the greatest satisfactions of being an author, teacher, and public speaker is the feedback I get from people who have read my books, attended a talk, heard me on the radio, seen me on TV, visited my website, or taken one of my classes. I get a lot of emails, and, thankfully, I’m often challenged to defend or clarify something I’ve written or said. It keeps me on my toes. Sometimes a real gem of a question whizzes through cyberspace and gets me thinking deeper and more carefully about an idea I’ve put out there.

I’ve collected these “gems” over the years, and have created an archive of “MindBytes”—a series of questions and answers organized under headings such as “God,” “Energy,” “Cosmos,” “Evolution,” “Miracles,” “Quantum,” “Time,” “Beliefs,” and, of course, “Consciousness.” These are “learning nuggets” that highlight important questions, and I include examples at the end of each chapter.  Part 4 of the book is composed of longer dialogues on topics such as “experience beyond belief,” “consciousness, energy, and evolution,” “are rocks conscious?” and “is consciousness the same as spirit?”

The rest of this interview is available at www.TheWisdomAcademy.org

You can get a free copy of the full interview here

or order a copy of the book here

What’s Up With ‘Energy Healing’?

Q: I’m an energy healer (reiki), and I’ve read where you say consciousness and matter always go together. If what you say is true, then I’m wondering how is it possible to send healing energy to another person in a distant place? As far as I know, nothing material passes between people in a healing session?

CdeQ: You are quite right: Nothing material or physical travels through space in cases of distant healing—not even energy. (Remember: matter is just a form of energy.)

What is often called “energy-healing” (including reiki, which I’ve studied and practiced) is, I think, more accurately called “consciousness healing.” It is healing that takes place through shared meaning.

All energy necessarily (and by definition) moves through space. Therefore, there cannot be any instantaneous transmission of energy from one part of space (healer) to some other part of space (healee). Yet, the literature is full of examples of so-called instantaneous “non-local” healing—where prayer or intention (e.g., in reiki) is correlated with apparently spontaneous and instant healing (even across great distances, for example from America to Europe, Africa,  or Asia, or vice versa).

When studied under scientific conditions, it is clear that the healing event took place faster than energy moving at the speed of light (hence “non-local” healing). And since energy cannot move faster than light, it follows that no energy could be traveling between healer and healee to account for the healing.

Something else must be going on. And, I say, that that “something else” is consciousness. Not energy.

Consciousness Transcends Space

Consciousness does not exist in space (it is not even “nonlocal” it is non-located), and therefore is not constrained by distances. It doesn’t take consciousness any time to travel from A to B, because consciousness doesn’t travel—period. It is not in space.

What happens in healing, I suggest, is that healer and healee share, or participate in, the same meaning: “heal”—or “wholeness,” or “thy will be done” or “divine perfection” or “let it be,” or whatever the intention is. While the healer’s intention may be conscious, the healee may participate unconsciously. He or she may not even know that healing is intended for him or her.

Here’s one way of thinking about what may be happening: The consciousness of the healer (always associated with the energy/body of the healer) forms an intention or clarifies a meaning (in this case: healing). This intention or meaning does not travel through space, and therefore it takes zero time for the consciousness of the healee to participate in sharing the meaning “healing.”

The moment the clarity of the healing intention is expressed by the healer, the healee responds to the new constellation of meaning in his/her body. Healing begins. No energy has been transferred from healer to healee; they simply participate in sharing the same meaning. And clarity of meaning, I propose, is how healing works.

What is meaning? It is “the experienced fit between self and other (or between self and environment)” If we don’t fit in, we are a “misfit,” and that’s another way of describing illness or dysfunction. On the other hand, when we experience fitting in (and this applies to the relationship between our body and our cells, and between our bodies and our environment) we realign with the larger intelligence and processes of nature “all the way down.”

And that, I think, is how healing happens. It is the restoration of natural balance and integration between various elements or parts of the universe. It happens through meaning shared in consciousness, not through exchanges of energy. In other words, healing  happens through meaning, not through mechanism.

More ‘MindBytes’ at www.deepspirit.com

C o n s c i o u s n e s s   f o r   E v e r y o n e

The Wisdom Academy is now offering a new program called “WisdomGems.”

It’s simple. It’s engaging. It’s enlightening. It’s open to anyone passionate about exploring the deepest meaning of life.

It works like this: You begin a dialogue with your mentor by simply emailing a question or idea about mind, soul, or spirit. Within hours, or a day at the most, you get a thoughtful response.

We work with you to develop the tools you need to explore, understand, and express the mystery of consciousness. Whether you want to share your own experiences, find out what experts have discovered, or learn how to communicate your own insights in words that will inspire others, we are here to guide you.

You choose your own focus: Science. Spirituality. Philosophy.

Find Out More About WisdomGems

T h e   W i s d om   A c a d e m y

Personal Mentorships in Consciousness

Integrating Philosophy, Spirituality, and Nature