MindStar

by Michael A Aquino

  subconsciously from innumerable sources since birth.

  More creative, artistic, mystical, etc. personalities may

  let their SUs run even more freely, to the point where the

  OU is of only occasional and necessary relevance to them.

  If some such persons reach a stage where their SUs have

  completely replaced the OU, they may be called “insane”;

  in this sense “sanity” is a measure of an individual’s

  suppression of his SU within socially-sanctioned

  boundaries.

  D. Subjective/Objective Interaction

  Once the simultaneous and permanent existence of

  the OU and SU is recognized, much of the mystery of

  human history and behavior is no longer mysterious. It

  just requires examination of each such individual, group,

  and/or event to identify the applicable OU forces and the

  various individual SUs through which they are being

  perceived and influenced, both subconsciously and

  consciously.

  At the subconscious level, for instance, an individual

  may assume that everyone else “sees the same reality”

  that he does, when in fact this is never completely the

  case.

  - 29 -

  At the conscious level the SU can be both easier and

  more problematic to handle. Easier to the extent that the

  individual is making willful decisions about how much of

  his SU he can successfully apply. More problematic

  insofar as others with their differing subconscious and

  conscious SUs may be present and involved.

  E. Collective Subjective Universes

  When more than one SU is present and involved in

  any society or problem situation, it should be obvious

  that no two of them will coincide, both in terms of

  subconscious “reality perception” and conscious values,

  desires, and actions applied.

  Hence both human society and human history is most

  accurately understood as attempts by the involved

  humans to reconcile their conflicting SUs into one or

  more community-approved Collective SUs (hereafter

  “CSU”). Sometimes this is possible through peaceful

  means such as education, reasoning, or argument. In

  other instances where conscious SUs are too passionate,

  or when subconscious SUs are too inflexible and

  intolerant, the individuals/groups may resort to coercion

  - aggressive and intensive indoctrination, conditioning,

  and reinforcement, along with the suppression or

  extermination of the offending “competitors” - to achieve

  the desired “reality”.

  In modern society, unsurprisingly, such coercion and

  intolerance are invariably attributed to “the enemy”,

  domestic outlaws, insurgents, revolutionaries, or other

  “alien” individuals or groups. It is assumed, without any

  need for argument or justification, that the community

  CSU into which its members have been conditioned since

  birth, is not just one among many options, but is

  “reality”. Questioning it thus goes beyond acceptable

  curiosity to “heresy”, “treason”, or “insanity”.

  - 30 -

  This was most famously caricatured in George

  Orwell’s novel 1984, in which failure to accept the Party’s

  CSU not just at the conscious but at the subconscious

  “reality” level was condemned as the worst of all possible

  sins: “thoughtcrime” - correspondingly requiring not just

  punishment but “curing” by destroying the offender’s

  ability to see “reality” other than through the Party’s CSU.

  F. The Universal Course of MindStar

  As foretold, the above keys to the age-old “mystery” of

  human behavior are not the least bewildering once one

  knows to look for and apply them.

  MindStar, however, is not merely a guide to the study

  of human rational and irrational behavior. It is not

  enough [nor is it reassuring!] just to realize that one is

  surrounded by a world of humanity which is trapped in a

  g e n e r a l l y - u n r e c o g n i z e d p r i s o n o f c o n f l i c t i n g

  subconscious and conscious SUs. From the smallest

  social unit to worldwide ideologies and wars, helpless and

  hapless people are flailing around with the “disease”

  without even recognizing it for what it is, much less

  treating its symptoms. It was for this reason that I wrote

  the companion book to MindStar: MindWar. Unlike

  MindStar, MindWar is a practical manual for the

  diagnosis and constructive correction of social violence

  from the community to the international scale. It is

  intentionally exoteric and unintrospective. It does not

  seek to expose ordinary minds to the metaphysics of

  consciousness. It is a prescription for the many, for the

  polis, not the individual.

  MindStar is quite the other thing: a guide exclusively

  for the individual, which never compromises with group

  influences, needs, perceptions, or pressures. It is a map to

  the Grail Castle, which journey and adventure are

  essentially and inescapably unique to each individual.

  - 31 -

  Chapter 2: Conscious Existence

  We are all wired into a survival trip now. No more of

  the speed that fueled that 60s. That was the fatal

  flaw in Tim Leary’s trip. He crashed around America

  selling “consciousness expansion” without ever

  giving a thought to the grim meat-hook realities that

  were lying in wait for all the people who took him

  seriously: all those pathetically eager acid freaks who

  thought they could buy Peace and Understanding for

  three bucks a hit. But their loss and failure is ours

  too. What Leary took down with him was the central

  illusion of a whole life-style that he helped create: a

  generation of permanent cripples, failed seekers,

  who never understood the essential old-mystic

  fallacy of the Acid Culture: the desperate assumption

  that somebody, or at least some force, is tending the

  light at the end of the tunnel. - Hunter S. Thompson

  A. Consciousness

  Having in Chapter #1 established and defined the

  environment in which existence occurs, it is next

  necessary to discuss who or what exists to perceive and

  interact with this environment. A phenomenon of

  distinction from that environment is essential, and it

  must be aware of itself to recognize and appreciate that

  distinction. It is inherently a function, not a thing,

  traditionally called “consciousness”. [The question of the

  - 32 -

  “thing that is conscious” is addressed in subsequent

  chapters.]

  Consciousness is both easy and difficult to establish -

  easy because its presence is obvious: the mere awareness

  [of self and/or anything else] characteristic of a living,

  sentient being. Having achieved this realization, the

  possessors of consciousness have found its constitution

  maddeningly elusive.

  Over the centuries theologians, philosophers, and

  scientists have sought to portray and advocate

&
nbsp; consciousness as something either supporting or refuting

  the existence of what is really their concern: the “soul”.

  B. Metaphysics: Consciousness as an Entity

  Since conventional theology regards consciousness as

  “the soul in action”, it has generally been happy to just

  blur the two concepts into a single, nothing-further-

  needed axiom of religious faith.

  Philosophers seeking to escape the label of such mere

  faith found that the moment they strayed from the simple

  act of self-awareness, they were actually addressing other

  issues, such as whether physical sensory input is/was

  occurring, whether such input is reliable, and indeed

  whether the mental processing of concepts and

  information (e.g. “thought”) should somehow be either a

  requirement or evidence of awareness. René Descartes’

  famous “cogito ergo sum” (= I think, therefore I am) is an

  example of such off-the-mark confusion; arguments both

  pro and con this maxim have all focused on the act of

  thinking rather than mere self-awareness.

  C. Physics: Consciousness as an Illusion

  Modern physical science is adamantly materialistic;

  any hint of a metaphysical presence or activity is

  - 33 -

  tantamount to heresy. If consciousness exists, therefore,

  it must be explainable [away] as the physical brain

  generating some form of illusory self-imagery.

  In support of this theory, scientists note that if the

  brain is anæsthetized, the individual “blacks out”. Also

  when the body and brain sleep, consciousness either

  blacks out or becomes merely a spectator to hallucination

  (e.g. dreaming).

  Upon examination both of these scientific claims fail

  to be conclusive. As ordinary consciousness is

  accustomed to being reactive to physical sensory input,

  the sudden muting of all such input by anæsthesia throws

  the consciousness into a sudden non-sensory mode with

  which it has no experience. The result is temporary

  inactivity, though below the level of sensory imagery it

  continues to receive stimulus signals from the physical

  body.

  In certain anæsthesia applications, moreover, the

  body’s transmissions to the consciousness are muted

  w h i l e t h a t c o n s c i o u s n e s s r e m a i n s a l e r t a n d

  communicative. If it were merely a function of the body’s

  normal physical sensory processes, this would not occur.

  Where sleep and dreaming are concerned, it has

  already been established that the quality and coherence

  of the act of thinking is an entirely different concern than

  self-awareness per se.

  Where ordinary sleep and dreaming are concerned,

  once again awareness must not be confused with

  thinking. In short, the random imagination characteristic

  of dreams, or the absence of such experiences if the

  resting brain has so lowered its sensory transmissions,

  has no relevance to awareness. Being self-aware does not

  require this to be continuous.

  - 34 -

  D. Inconsequence

  The phenomenon of self-awareness is as a simple

  incident essential to validating the distinction between

  the individual and the OU. Beyond this, however, it is not

  a component of either a “soul” or the physical brain/body

  which can be used to verify either premise. Indeed in the

  search for the “soul” awareness is something of a red

  herring, being confused with the thinking process by

  agenda-advocates.

  - 35 -

  Chapter 3: Egypt

  Poor men, most admirable, most pitiable,

  With all their changes all their great Creeds change

  For Man, this alien in my family,

  Is alien most in this, to cherish dreams

  And brood on visions of eternity,

  And build religions in his brooding brain

  And in the dark depths awe-full of his soul.

  My other children live their little lives,

  Are born and reach their prime and slowly fail,

  And all their little lives are self-fulfilled;

  They die and are no more, content with age

  And weary with infirmity. But Man

  Has fear and hope and phantasy and awe,

  And wistful yearnings and unsated loves,

  That strain beyond the limits of his life,

  And therefore Gods and Demons, Heaven and Hell:

  This Man, the admirable, the pitiable.

  - James Thomson, A Voice from the Nile

  A. Confronting Ancient Egypt

  It is impossible to proceed further with this inquiry

  without bringing to bear the wisdom of ancient Egypt. By

  contrast, the efforts of later cultures have been little more

  than ignorant fumbling in the dark.

  - 36 -

  Before turning to the specifics of Egyptian knowledge

  in this area, however, popular modern misperceptions

  must be at least briefly corrected.

  The topic of ancient Egypt generally has been one of

  both exhaustive examination by and contentious debate

  between conventional Egyptologists and independent

  investigators.

  The former group generally agree that Egypt was

  simply an agricultural society comparable to that of other

  Mediterranean/Near-Eastern cultures of the time-period.

  It was notable for its enigmatic hieroglyphic writing

  system, odd-looking formalized art, peculiar massive

  building projects, and morbid, animal-totem religious

  cultism.

  The latter group, while differing in the details, see

  Egypt rather as a remarkable, indeed startling exception

  to its primitive neighbors. It was uniquely a civilization

  and repository of great sophistication and wisdom - in

  some respects so much so, indeed, that the very ability of

  the Egyptians themselves to have generated such utopian

  wonders is called into question in favor of Atlanteans,

  extraterrestrial visitors, and/or incarnated gods.

  Each camp routinely ridicules the other. The

  conventionalists denounce the independents as

  unscientific dreamers and “pyramidiots”. The latter are

  equally contemptuous of the former, considering them as

  merely a brittle academic self-protectorate afraid to

  violate modern taboos.

  And there are two taboos in particular which

  institutional academia does not dare to transgress - or

  even openly acknowledge as taboos.

  First, modern [Western] civilization is assumed to be

  at the zenith of human sophistication in all respects. It

  has been steadily improving over the last five thousand

  years (after recorded history officially began ca. 3000

  BCE). Since the passage of time mandates social

  - 37 -

  evolution and improvement, it is heresy to suggest that

  an ancient civilization, particularly one at the very

  beginning of this progression, could actually have been

  superior to its successors, including those today, in some

  if not all respects.

  Secondly, the world today is divided into three major

  monotheistic religions: Jud
aism, Christianity, and Islam.

  All, even in countries where they have become largely

  propaganda devices for the control of the lesser-

  intelligent masses, are as exclusive and intolerant as

  politically permitted. Despite their doctrinal differences,

  however, they are all agreed that there exists but one

  God - the Hebraic JHVH. Thus all polytheism, whether

  new or old, is false and fictitious. It follows that any such

  fiction cannot possibly be as, much less more

  sophisticated than Hebraic monotheism [as triple-

  modified]. Egyptian religion may be studied, exploited for

  artistic purposes and horror movies, but never actually

  believed in.

  B. Egyptian History

  Let us now review those aspects of ancient Egypt on

  which most scholars, the academic and the arcane, might

  be expected to find some common ground.

  The earliest existing evidence of human culture in the

  Nile valley dates to more than 250,000 BCE, as the

  remnants of hand axes and other stone tools have been

  uncovered 50-100’ below the Nile’s silt terrace.

  Sometime between 10,000 and 7,000 BCE, according

  to conventional archæology, a most important event took

  place - the domestication of the wild African goat and the

  subsequent freedom to begin cultivation of grain. This

  effectively heralded the beginning of human civilization,

  as for the first time primitive man was free to turn his

  thoughts to matters other than a constant search for food.

  - 38 -

  By the same consensus, it was in the pre-dynastic

  Gerzean period (commencing about 3600 BCE) that the

  first communities of the future Egyptian nation came into

  existence. A great war of unification commenced in

  approximately 3400 BCE. After more than two centuries

  of intermittent conflict between Upper and Lower Egypt,

  the land was finally united under Menes (or Narmer), the

  first pharaoh of the I Dynasty. 6

  Inhabiting a land characterized by the regularity of

  the elements (behavior of the winds, the Nile, the climate,

  the Sun, and the skies), the Egyptians sought perfection

  in stability, harmony, symmetry, geometry, and a cyclical

  [as opposed to progressive or linear] concept of time.

  In modern culture we take progressive/linear time for

  granted. It is as inevitable and inexorable as the hands of

  the wristwatches to which we are gently, yet firmly