~ Rich's Writings ~

A Collection of Writings by Rich Van Winkle

Click here to return to the Home Page

 


Truly Divine?

A common theme within human culture since our earliest times has been the belief in or acceptance of the existence of divine beings. In the Judeo-Christian religions these beings are described in several forms and at various levels with YAHWEH or “God” being the “Host of Hosts” (God of Gods). The other gods are not explained, listed, or given much heed, but the lesser divine beings are often named and are sometimes explained[1]. A common function of the lesser divine beings, especially the “angels”, has been to act as messengers[2] of God and the most important role of the other “gods” (such as the “Holy Spirit” or Ruach Hako'desh) has been the inspiration of humans. In monotheistic theology we have largely neglected the distinction between The Divine and the truly divine.

God as the ultimate Creator (ultimate source or cause of everything known) must inherently be an unknowable entity. God is too complex, too perfect, and too powerful to be grasped by humans. We attempt to simply God through anthropomorphism and terming the plural entity (the biblical God is a “they”) in singular (masculine) as “father”. We also attribute to God levels of omniscience and omnipotency which defy both logic and evidence. And yet there is this compelling and nearly universal sense among us that we are aware of a divine presence and that God somehow influences our lives – we are inspired and at times we do benefit from revelation.

Our confusion arises from a lack of inspiration and revelation: we generally form our perception of God based upon what we have been taught, told, or shown by others. That perception is generally far from truthful, logical, or useful. It is time for us to rebuild our awareness of God through the means God has provided and to validate our perceptions of God using the tools we have been given or have created (logic and science). I have provided detailed analysis of God’s nature elsewhere. I have also proposed a non-divine intermediate entity which fits our notion of “collective consciousness”. Here we will examine two higher divine forms which fit within a logical, evidentiary, and inspired framework – the Zatheons[3] and the Shakmurti[4].

In the resulting hierarchy, we have the following:

·        God – the ultimate Creator (not an individual, nature unknowable)[5]

·        Zatheons – the “divine agents” (collective individuals)

·        Shakmurti – divinely aware non-humans (individuals and collections)

·        Humans  – aware humans (individuals only)

·        Conscious – a being/entities which is/are self-aware (usually individuals)

·        Non-conscious – beings/entities/things which are not self-aware (not individuals).

These functional descriptors identify transcendental stages which are not absolute. In other words, they are points along a gradient which has many other possible categorical descriptors. They all relate to the same singularity and therefore are all interrelated (as is all consciousness within the Universe). For example, humans who attain higher levels of divine awareness are at an intermediate stage between humans and Shakmurti.

Perhaps the best way to grasp the divine hierarchy is to follow its evolutionary progression. Non-conscious entities (such as molecules) evolved to become more ordered, complex and aware and conscious beings (animals) which evolved to become more complex, ordered, and aware beings who might grasp God (humans). We may evolve to become more complex, ordered, and aware entities which more fully grasp God and the means by which God relates to other conscious beings (Shakmurti).

Of course, we have no direct connection to or knowledge of Shakmurti. This should lead us to one of two conclusions – they either don’t/can’t exist or they are more fully trans-physical entities[6]. If one understands and accepts what science tells us about evolution within the Universe, then we have no logical choice but to accept the possibility of a next evolutionary stage. Logic also dictates that this next step is both non-physical (at least mostly) and results in a transcendental increase in awareness consistent with the prior steps. Whether or not other beings have accomplished this evolutionary step is uncertain, but probabilistically speaking it is a near certainty. In other words, Shakmurti are the logical extension of the most proven science.

It may be that we are incapable of grasping the full function and nature of Shakmurti. I propose the following attributes and characteristics as being partially representative (all detailed below):

·        They continue to rely upon physical sustenance.

·        They create with powers we would perceive as “magical”.

·        They utilize technological aids.

·        They have transcendental Will.

·        They seek divine connections and perfection of righteousness.

·        They are fantastically creative within a rigorous ethical system.

If you see how and why humans are an intermediate stage between evolutionary plateaus, then the derivation of these attributes and characteristics becomes clear. With that perspective, we should examine each briefly.

We rely upon physical sustenance – our base energy is provided by metabolism where energy stored in certain substances is extracted through de-evolutionary processes. We transform that energy into less energetic forms to create “will” and movement (primarily thought and intended actions). The resultant creativity (and its purposes) are generally beyond the grasp of entities which are not at the same evolutionary stage. Within the physical framework of our existence, we rely heavily upon tools (technology) to provide ourselves energy and opportunities. Within our non-physical existence, we also utilize “tools” (language/culture, etc.) which expand our consciousness and abilities. The primary evolutionary manifestation of our existence is the creation of will towards purpose. When we attempt to align our will with what we perceive as God’s Will, we are attempting righteousness. Will which is created beyond that which we need for survival or self-enhancement is “transcendental”.

Those of us who have attained greater awareness or “enlightenment” have better grasp of reality and broader perspective of divinity. That results in greater morality, more ethical structures, and even greater awareness. Thus, more advanced humans see increasing awareness as both evolutionary and righteous. They grasp the reality of God and the morality of seeking both divine connections and perfection of God’s Will. In turn they are more objectively creative than other humans and they routinely seek to advance human ethical structures and systems.

The nature of Shakmurti is thus extrapolated from our own nature and the evolutionary (divine) processes which produced us. Of course, the very nature of transcendental evolutionary advancement yields results which are unforeseeable by beings at lower levels and we should therefore presume that Shakmurti will have attributes and characteristics which are beyond our grasp.

We should wonder why the existence of more advanced evolutionary entities is not openly known and widely evident. Perhaps the evidence is readily apparent to beings more advanced than we are. But more likely is a logical presumption: more advanced beings find it both unethical and unrighteous to directly interfere in our evolutionary process and at this point in our growth the mere knowledge of such entities would change our evolution[7].

Akin to Gene Roddenberry’s “prime directive” (from “Star Trek”), we might easily see why the direct interference of any more advanced species upon the cultural and intellectual advancement of another species would be unethical – it is the “right” of any species to evolve in its own way, at its “natural” pace”, and through “normal” processes. But aside from the ethical issues, we should also see the theological issue: if evolution is the “crown of creation” (as God’s greatest good) then who are we to think that our interference could be an improvement. Shakmurti would unquestionably restrict their contact with us (as would any more divine/more moral beings). Before we look at how and when such contact might be ethical, we will look briefly at the Zatheons.

We have much more trouble understanding the Zatheons than we do the Shakmurti. But we readily understand the limitations of a necessary physical existence (where our energy must come from metabolic processes).  At some point evolution permits an entirely different kind of existence – one that moves beyond physical dependency.  We have conceptualized this as a “spiritual” existence without giving it due consideration. While from our perspective Zatheons would seem to be purely spiritual beings, it is their level of physical existence which most clearly differentiates them from God. Let us follow the evolutionary train again…

As the Shakmurti evolve under their own direction, they eventually master physical reality. The key element of such mastery is the ability to directly transform energy-matter through will (“intention”). Through the direct manipulation of the “quantum” information which underlies the entire physical nature of the Universe, Zatheons no longer need bodies to metabolize or compartmentalize their existence. While we might readily see this potentiality its actualization has numerous difficulties (and we shall save that discussion for another time). Lacking a need for physical sustenance or presence does not fully isolate Zatheons from physical reality – they still utilize the structural and empowering forces of the physical realm to advance non-physical evolution.

On the continuum of ordered complexity Zatheons are “light years” (several quantum leaps) ahead of us[8]. We rely upon physical complexity to discover transformational processes (those which yield significant emergent properties) while Zatheons use non-physical complexity to create transformational processes. In most ways we would view Zatheons as “gods” (although they would view the idea as silly).

·        They continue to rely upon physical structures – energy, dimensions, and processes – while directly manipulating them.

·        They create with powers we (and Shakmurti) would perceive as “divine”.

·        They utilize inherent physical and non-physical “tools” which we will never grasp.

·        They have transcendental Will allowing the direct control of almost all physical and non-physical aspects of reality.

·        They have divine connections and use them to perfect righteousness.

·        They are mysteriously creative within a moral system.

Viewing the progressions of complexity, capability, and creativity we can extrapolate our own abilities and experiences to more advanced beings or entities. But we cannot anticipate nor grasp the functional details of their existence – except in one domain. The thing which we have most in common with the Shakmurti, the Zatheons, and with God is consciousness. Because we can look backward (or downward) at other less conscious beings, we can see both the progression and the nature of expanding consciousness. We are more aware, more willful, and more divine than our predecessors and co-beings.  Those attributes and characteristics also distinguish those with more advanced consciousness.

There are two other key aspects of the more divine which we can discuss meaningfully. First is the change in individuality and the second is changing functionality. As individuals we experience reality with independent consciousness , memories, and thoughts. We have an individual identity which collects our perceptions within a single contextual framework. “I am…”. However, we are also part of a society which has a different type of consciousness and its own memories. It collects perceptions as a collective and deals with them collectively. “We are…” At this point in our evolution the individual and its involvement in the collection are highly distinct and separated almost completely. As we advance, the two will merge.

Our understanding of this should begin with the simple realization that we are inherently collective beings. We are a group of billions and billions of individual organisms (“cells”) which have come together cooperatively to form an individual. Our very consciousness only emerges because we begin as a collection. When we cooperate with each other in societies, another form of consciousness emerges – one which is very rudimentary at the human level.  We have every reason to believe that a large collection of sufficiently ordered humans (perhaps artificially enhanced) will lead to a new emergent consciousness which may have its own identity. It is at this stage that Shakmurti may exist as individuals acting collectively. What we are just coming to recognize is that we already participate in a non-physical collection of consciousness which is either a divine remnant or an emergent property created by Zatheons (or both).

It is here that we find a failure in language as we have yet to develop terminology to express our perceptions regarding the collective conscious (which is also why I have coined the terms Shakmurti and Zatheon). While we could continue to use terms such as “angels” or “Holy Spirit” to identify our unclear perceptions, these terms carry distracting and misleading connotations. The key concept is that we have widespread perceptions regarding “messages” received from some other consciousness which tend to be both moral and inspirational. We have previously failed to create a workable conception for the source of these perceptions.

This leads us to the function of higher or more divine forms. Once we understand that our function stems from creativity (as a function of intelligence, will, and ethics) and that our highest form of creativity is ethical structures, we may extend the idea to Shakmurti and Zatheons. They also build upon the idea of creativity and the creation of ethical structures. But what kind of ethical structures might they create? Since God’s primary process in Creation is evolution and since evolution has created consciousness as it greatest ethical structure, we can, at least, presume that the creation of greater and higher consciousness is a primary functional goal of the higher forms. Since our awareness already yields some conception of collective consciousness and since our own social consciousness is our greatest achievement, we can readily deduce that there is a cyclical/recursive potential for consciousness whereby increasing consciousness can result in even greater increases in consciousness.

Finally, we can deduce the end result of the entire process: the Universe exists to maximize consciousness and consciousness has the result of awareness of the divine. Awareness of God increases morality and will and they form the basis of greater consciousness – even Divine consciousness.



[1] Note also Genesis 6:2-4; Job 1:1-2:7; Neh. 9:6. See http://www.gotquestions.org/names-of-angels.html noting Lucifer. “Who in the skies can be compared to the Lord?  Who among the heavenly beings is like the Lord, a God greatly to be feared in the Council of the Holy Ones, and awesome above all who are around [the “Lord God of hosts”] (Psalm 89:6-9).

[2] The word for angel in Hebrew (מַלְאָך or “malak”) means messenger.

[3] While Thea is originally from the Greek root which means “Divine”, it has also been used to refer to the both the Titan goddess of sight and to a monotheistic God. Here it goes back to its roots and means “very divine”. See “Heidegger and the Essence of Man” by Michel Haar, SUNY Press (1993), p. 193.

[4] A term I have derived from Hindu conceptions of sub-divinity without direct equivalency in English. See below.

[5] Does God have a “god”? – irrelevant.

[6] We are also trans-physical beings in that we are non-physical entities ties to physical “bodies”.

[7] Perhaps our current deduction will open the door to a “revelation”.

[8] We operate systems which order or manipulate trillions of “bits” of information; Zatheons directly order many trillions of trillions of bits in order to accomplish the simplest of physical changes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please let me know if you have comments about or corrections for this web site.

rich1vanwinkle@yahoo.com


This is a Rich's Writings Essay Page. To return to the Essay List, click here.


Email us at: Comments@thehumanfuture.net
Join our email list
Visit our Store
Sign our Guest Book!

See our "Fair Use", Privacy, Copyright, and Terms of Use policies and agreements by clicking on the item.

This website and its contents are Intellectual Property  - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED! 2010  by Rich Van Winkle