On The
Power of Intent - Part II
Lucius
Ringwald
INTENT AND IDENTITY
Earlier, I spoke of the many layers of energy projections that people send into the Etheric atmosphere around them. Intent is another metaphysical force that plays a leading role in how people form, maintain and express their identity. The Intent of identity is a process of projecting paradigms about the nature of one’s character and the limitations of one’s potential.
Intent is responsible for maintaining the continuity of everything that we believe ourselves to be. We form our personalities by investing Creative Power in certain images of ourselves, Intending them to become a part of the self-image. Intent gives structure, a sense of “realness,” and different assignments of value to the mental patterns which form our identity.
Righteous alienation
When people judge others to affirm the idea that they are superior, they increase their sense of alienation. The same is true of regarding oneself as inferior to someone else; the projected alienation just goes in the opposite direction. The more we judge, the more separate we become. Judging others serves to bolster our own values, but it does not help the other person, and also puts us in a mindset that is closed to self-examination. Intent, as a reflection of the will which maintains our identity, becomes focused on preserving this feeling of separateness.
Judgments are not the same as critical observations; the difference is the emotional framework. Judgmental perspectives are rooted in feelings such as contempt, blame, and resentment on the “superior” side, and self-pity, shame, and self-loathing in the “inferior” side. These feelings are extremely draining to our creative, vital energy (not to be confused with Creative Power).
Human beings use a great amount of Creative Power when they view themselves, or other people, from a standpoint of irreconcilable conflict and separateness, or righteous alienation. The restrictive identity images that we uphold maintain their existence, at the expense of our energy and will, until we learn to untie the knots of misguided Intent that created them. Until a person resolves the patterns of Intent underlying judgmental perspectives, he or she will continually use valuable Creative Power sustaining them.
As I discussed in Chapter One, any judgment that we direct toward another person has a counterpart in ourselves, for what we judge is an aspect of our own potential for identity. In a sense, the self-images that we project—whether they focus on one’s own personality or that of someone else—mirror our consciousness. This realization is critical to understanding how Intent relates to human identity.
When we focus Intent into maintaining dualistic images of our own identity, we use up precious Creative Power repeating unfulfilling behaviors and limiting beliefs about ourselves. Internalized conflicts draw on our creative potential until we find a way to integrate the opposing fragments of our being into an expansive, balanced, and whole-istic understanding of ourselves. Fortunately, there are many ways to find release from constrictive identity patterns. Most of these center taking a more critical look at our own emotions. Simply reflecting on old, deep feelings within ourselves can nudge us toward the integration that part of us yearns for.
The ego directs a great deal of our Intent. To take this power out of the ego’s hands, we must rechannel its underlying energy toward “higher” pursuits. We can accomplish this by identifying patterns of intent and changing their motivating force—from lower emotions such as apathy, fear, anger, and self pity to higher-emotional goals which center around integration and expansiveness. This is an “economical” approach, for it keeps much of the content but changes the character; we don’t always need to break Intent down and start from scratch to make it more aligned with our ideals.
Every time we recognize and resolve opposing, fragmented self-images, more Creative Power becomes available for our conscious use, for it is no longer locked in the same pattern. Thus, a “fringe benefit” of becoming less judgmental is that we incrementally increase the power of our will, as well as the intensity of our lives. The true benefits are deeper, however. When a person’s awareness becomes less fixated on constricting self-images and ideas—those which revolve around fear, unworthiness, or overpowering others—there is more available for embodying higher qualities such as inspiration, joy, and good will.
When people want to change their beliefs about who they are—or who they want to be—they may be tempted to try to “erase” older images of themselves in favor of more recent ideals. The problem with this approach is that when we try to disregard and deny unwanted self-images, the old identities often continue to exist at an unconscious level. Suppressed identity fragments sap our Creative Power whether or not we are aware of them. When people try to get rid of unwanted aspects of their identity, it may seem that they have vanquished the personal demon when they have really just pushed it down to an unconscious level of the psyche. Suppressing part of oneself with inwardly directed aggression does not resolve the pattern of Intent at the root of that specific self-concept.
To truly resolve complex and deep-set fragments of ourselves, we need to integrate them into our total self-image. Trying to replace them with something else is like turning your stereo louder so that you can’t hear the noisy neighbors who live next door. The underlying buzz of conflict remains, and we must put an inordinate amount of energy into blocking it out with something else.
Understanding the Intent of identity
Learning about the relationship between Intent and identity leads one to the realization that the Intent which people project not only shapes their own self-image—it also influences the identity of all the people with whom they interact. Every one of us constantly uses this ability, though unwittingly in most cases. Our everyday, casual judgments have an impact on others; the same is true for intense appreciation and support for someone else. Learning to recognize that our consciousness affects over others allows people to take greater responsibility for the ways that they we are all connected.
Intending Self-Realization
With all of life’s dilemmas and preoccupations, it can be difficult to stay mindful of our “highest” ideals in each moment. When people help each other by giving support, empathy, and constructive feedback, they can bring the higher qualities of human identity more within reach. Intent is an important part of this mutual support, and learning how this power works can increase the extent to which we can assist one another.
If we are aware of higher ideals in others which aren’t totally manifest, we can use our Intent to help clarify those ideals, making it easier for the person to realize them. This is similar to the idea of “projecting positive energy” which James Redfield spoke of in The Celestine Prophecy, but instead of energy, we directly engage the Intent underlying human identity.
We can help other people embody their personal higher ideals by adding our own Creative Power to the most creative, benign and balanced qualities that we perceive in them at a given time. When we work to ground our Intent in benevolence and clarity, and to not condemn or judge, we can lend another person the strength to shake out of restrictive patterns of thought and behavior. People are meant to use their Intent in such a way that they continually support one another’s ideals, instead of reinforcing static, counterproductive attributes. When people focus on these goals in their daily interactions, they naturally help each other to achieve a more meaningful, dynamic state of perception.
Like so many esoteric capabilities that I’ve discussed in this book, benign Intent is a process that occurs all the time in people’s interactions with one another. What most people are missing is not the ability, but the awareness of what they are doing. If they could engage the dynamic of benign intent in a conscious way, the results would be even more rewarding for all concerned.
Where To Draw The Line
One problem that arises when trying to apply benign Intent is thinking that we are the best judge of another person’s ideals. Intent ceases to be truly benign when our egos get involved—when we cease to perceive others as they really are, and instead think in terms of what we think they ought to become. This is a difficult distinction, and one that logic is not always able to resolve; to understand it, one must draw upon the heart’s wisdom. The crucial realization is that we cannot “give” people realizations, but we can sometimes lend some of our strength and clarity to a process of insight that already exists in a person.
The reasons for a certain pattern in a person’s learning are often beyond our ability to discern, even if the pattern seems to be one of not learning. Presuming the right to impose our choices on others—if the apparent ideals seem helpful—is a mistake; we do not know the whole story, so we are likely to end up interfering with the natural course of a person’s spiritual and psychological growth. In many cases, it also takes our own course off the track.
Limiting projections
The intent of identity is a two-edged sword. We can direct it toward fostering progression in others’ awareness, but we can just as easily inhibit others’ personal growth by projecting what could be called “counter-ideals.” This isn’t usually deliberate; the most common forms of limiting Intent result from nothing more than people’s customary views of each other.
Preconceptions about one another’s character can limit people at a level that exceeds a purely psychological dynamic. The reason for this is that all impressions carry a certain amount of Intent, and this gives them the power to directly influence human identity. Whenever people make habitual judgments of each other, they may be inhibiting the other person’s movement toward a fuller self-knowledge. This can even happens when someone is physically far removed from the other person.
When we assume that other people are bound to certain patterns of thinking and behaving, we may be unwittingly making it more difficult for them to grow as people—even if we’re not projecting an especially negative image. Our energy may be inhibiting their personal growth on a direct level, especially when we focus on dualistic, unchanging images of people we know.
The most harmful projections are those which are the most emotionally loaded: self-concepts such as “victim,” “pathetic,” “idiotic,” or “ridiculous.” These ideas carry such an intense debilitating power because they stem from fear and self-pity, both of which burn our creative energy. There is usually some truth to such labels, whether we direct them at others or ourselves. All people try in their way to make things better, to expose the truth and resolve conflict. When people judge others according to these labels, they usually believe that they are making a positive difference.
It is possible to acknowledge and deal with limitations without making ourselves or another person more limited in the process. We can observe a regressive trait in another person without resenting them for it. This means looking past our loaded judgments and seeing the qualities for what they are: patterns which limit a person’s potential. This stance leaves room for the insight and empathy to know that there are also other qualities present in a person, and to help bring these to the surface.
There is a converse to the principle of identity restriction: we can use the Intent of Identity to help other people overcome “stuck” patterns. When we notice areas in which people seem to restrict their own possibilities, focusing on their higher ideals—the balanced, dynamic aspects of their self-image can give them extra strength to break out of these limiting patterns. Like any ideal, however, people can only initiate inner change of their own volition; Intent can only gives one an extra advantage, by supplementing much-needed qualities such as courage, clarity, and self-love.
At times, people use judgments as a way of intentionally limiting others’ sense of identity. When we direct antagonistic judgments toward people, our basic Intent is for their identity to fit a limited, counter-evolutionary view of who they are. This process, sad to say, is one of the most common trans-material elements in human interaction.
CONSCIOUS INTENT
As I mentioned earlier, mystics of the past would have had some compelling reasons not to share their knowledge with the human race as a whole. Many of these disincentives still apply in the modern world, but for this author, the potential benefits of this knowledge becoming more widespread are far greater. Along these lines, I have included a section that describes some nuts-and-bolts pointers on how to bring conscious command to this force.
Clarity, Focus, and Emotion
The power of one’s Intent depends on three main factors: clarity, focus, and emotion. The first element, clarity, is a matter of how well we envision the whole combination of specific purpose that we seek to Intend. Focus is a matter of staying centered on the object of our Intent. Emotion is the amalgam of feelings that predominate in our field of conscious awareness at the time that we seek to project our Intent. Each of these qualities is dependent on the others, though people can choose to develop any single quality and neglect the others.
Clarity can depend on many factors, such as our level of energy, our determination, whether we are well-rested, and so on. The more clearly we can hold the thought or feeling of what we seek to Intend, the more effective the Intent will be. Self-pity, self-aggrandizement, and worry are some of the most difficult obstacles to experiencing clarity. These states of mind all introduce a dissonant element that effects our awareness much like electrical interference disrupts a radio signal.
If we seek to consciously Intend something but our attention continually wanders to other things, we will bring those objects of our focus into the projection as well. As many occult practitioners know, conscious Intent’s power depends greatly on how well we can divest attention from our usual preoccupations and focus it on a single object.
Our emotions are have the greatest influence on the intensity and the quality of our Intent. Emotions are always at the root of Intent, for they are its basic power source. A critical factor in exploring the power of manifestation is that we become aware of how our emotional state affects how we Intend; this applies to unconscious projections as well as those that we deliberately produce. If we are not fully conscious of what we are feeling, directed Intent can have a very different effect than what we expect.
Emotions determine the character—and thus, largely affect the outcome—of conscious Intent. When we are feeling happy, for instance, we may be able not be able to clearly focus our Intent, but the exuberance that we project will attract experiences that are joyful and satisfying. If we are full of contempt or anger, on the other hand, we may find it easy to fixate our power on an object (another person, for example), but the consciousness behind that Intent will be narrow, and the effects will be counterproductive for all concerned.
Certain emotional states are ideal for seeking to direct Intent toward a certain outcome. I referred to these earlier as the “higher,” or expansive, emotional states: compassion, courage, and lighthearted humor are just a few examples. Centering oneself in these evolutionary feelings lends itself to the expansiveness and clarity needed to responsibly direct Intent. When these emotions pervade our identity, our Intent naturally reflects our wisest and most benevolent expressions of identity.
The emotions that most hinder our Intent reflect back to us distortions in our awareness. Though I usually take issue with hierarchical models, I call these the lower emotions. A few examples of basic “lower” emotions are despair, shame, blame, contempt, pity, and malice. Many lower emotions have less regressive counterparts that can appear to be the same thing: self-pity is not synonymous with sadness, and being ashamed is quite different from feeling remorse about our actions.
When we consciously channel Intent, we must always be careful that the ego’s influence is not present in our emotions at any level. The ego can cleverly disguise lower emotions or attach them to higher emotions, distorting our sense of clarity and purpose. If we are not careful, the ego can infuse lower emotions into a projection when it seems to us that our Intended comes from a place of total peace and mindfulness. We invite such distortions when we confuse “higher” emotional energies with their “lower” correlates. It is common for people to mistake pity for compassion, pride for courage, or dominion for strength, especially when the ego is trying to run the show.
Implications of Conscious Intent
When people learn to engage and command Intent, they access a power that can affect the course of their lives in incredible ways. People everywhere transform themselves day by day, and most of them don’t know that all the while, they are directing this primal force to redefine patterns in their lives. When people take command of the power of Intent, they begin to bring conscious focus to an essential ingredient in personal change. Intent is the vehicle of the human will, the force behind our ability to redefine our understanding.
Emotions are the most decisive factor involved with any Intent that we direct toward the future. When we direct an emotion toward a probable event in the future—whether it be fear, anticipation, hope or conviction—we increase the likelihood that the event will occur. Projections that stem from our feelings take their character from what we were feeling when we created them.
The significance of this at a social level is that every time people bolster feelings or competition, animosity, or misdirected desire, they are unwittingly bolstering the prevalence of these attributes in human societies. The destructive effects of lower emotions also have an impact on events, from the grandest to the most trivial.
One does not need to have a malevolent motive to exert a regressive influence over events with lower-emotional fixation. Emotionally charged Intent carries out its function regardless of the intention behind it. The power of Intent doesn’t distinguish between “good” and “bad” patterns; it attempts to bring anything into being that our consciousness commands. For the most part, Intent is an impersonal force—it is subject to the will of the individual. We should not assume that, just by tuning in to a metaphysical power, we will automatically produce a perfect outcome. Like other esoteric abilities, Intent reflects back who we are—warts and all. It can, however, be developed and refined in accord with our evolving ideals.
Intent is also available to many levels of each person’s psyche. Unconscious identity fragments, such as those which comprise the ego, are responsible for much of the Intent that people produce. Unconsciously, human beings understand a great deal about our transmaterial capabilities.. and not all of them use the knowledge wisely. Levels of the ego, for instance, can shape Intent with deliberate purpose, giving it an advantage over our conscious identity.
Fear As A Probability Magnet
Fear, unfortunately, is one of the most effective emotions for attracting future probabilities. Terror is the most extreme form of fear. When people feel terrified that a horrible future will come to pass, the fear that dominates their awareness will actually propel them toward the fate that they envision. Lesser degrees of fear can also attract extremely “negative” outcomes.
In these turbulent times, many people channel a great deal of fear into ideas about the future. Some people, for instance, fear that we are all headed for a global dictatorship, in which no one truly has free will and children are conditioned from birth to be subservient social robots. Investing potent emotions in such ideas may seem to be an agent of change that opposes them. While it may is true that being aware of a possibility can help people understand how to avert it (or prepare, if it comes down to that), lower-emotional fixation can actually have the opposite effect.
The same is true of people who have hope—or conviction—that oppressive and destructive futures will come to pass. A number of people in Western societies believe that in the near future, “Aliens” will come from the sky and beam up a select group of humans, followed by a period of great destruction. Some take this to be a positive development for the human race, while others who believe roughly the same story seek to thwart the allegedly impending Armageddon. In terms of Intent, either person’s perspective can create a destructive projection. The reason for this is that a high level of mental fixation, combined with an intense underlying emotion (respectively, anticipation and a mix of fear and determination), produces a most potent form of Intent. It doesn’t make a difference whether someone prays for a future of global destruction or is filled with terror at the idea; any powerful emotional fixation will attract a given probability toward the “future present.”
A question that people have asked for as long as there have been those who could convey it is whether evil, the embodiment of regressiveness and destruction, is more powerful than the force of good. This applies somewhat to Intent; the question is whether restrictive kinds of Intent—be they deliberate or unintended—have a greater power over human beings than the more expansive, balanced types. In the prolific Star Wars films, this mythological battle struggle was played out in the represented in the underlying battle between “The Force” and the “Dark Side of The Force.”
Fear is not to be taken lightly, but human beings’ ability to influence an outcome is strongest when we use higher emotions, such as compassion or courage, to set the course of our Intent. Even without a deliberate focus, the Intent that people produce can have profoundly positive consequences when the intention behind it is pure, but its influence is more haphazard. We have been conditioned to project Intent in the direction of any emotionally charged image in our minds, so in most cases, whether the effects are for good or ill depends on the integrity of a person’s awareness.
The majority of Earth’s population uses Intent unconsciously. If significantly more people learn to utilize conscious Intent, the result would be a formidable power for change. A lack of conscious direction, coupled with the multitude of other concerns that dominate their attention, mean that most of the Intent which people project isn’t very powerful by itself.
Most of humanity’s total power is tied up in intending hopes and fears simultaneously. These patterns of Intent usually don’t produce significant positive change, because the lower projections diffuse the potency of the higher: when they are not at odds with one another, they are busy battling other people’s projected hopes and fears.
Directing Intent toward a broader social purpose, such as helping society overcome a prevalent and destructive conflict, can oppose the power of regressive projections. One does not have to possess “perfect” awareness or emotional balance for this to be effective; the most important thing is that the intentions behind the projection are free from conflict. (I will once again encourage the reader to not rely solely on metaphysics to oppose oppressive structures and people, or any other social maladies.)
Conscious Intent In Groups
The most common example of powerful Intent projection is found in large groups of people who share certain goals or convictions (such as members of a religion or a nation at war). The fact that this Intent is created without awareness does not reduce its power, for it is founded in conviction and a strong sense of purpose. The three main ingredients—clarity, focus, and emotion—are all present. As largely successful wars illustrate, however, faith alone does not always make people’s cause a benevolent one.
Working to become more conscious of ourselves can give us a better grasp on how to use our Intent. Dispelling internal conflict leads us to a more expansive and unified sense of who we are. In the process, we come to a greater state of focus, clarity, and emotional balance, and a greater command of Intent naturally follows. The more clear and integrated our identity becomes, the more essential creative energy is available. This inner development makes it easier for people to ground their intent in a clear sense of purpose.
Not everyone has the time or the initiative for the long-term self-discipline that is the best way to develop a command over Intent. There is another approach which can be quite effective for focusing Intent, the downside being that the potency and purity of these projections isn’t as high. I’m referring to the “quick-fix” road to unity that I discussed in The section on Identity: becoming very centered in a certain self-image, but suppressing many unresolved fragments of ourselves in the process. This type of intent is less potent because we are projecting it as “less of ourselves” than we could be; it is less pure because the conflicts that we have buried deep in our psyches will inevitably come through in our conscious ideas and motivations. Less conscious fragments use less personal power than some of the more active ones, but the cumulative draining effect is immense.
One incentive for people to learn techniques of Intent is that as people’s understanding of this force increases, they gain more tools for resolving personal conflict. I have already discussed how becoming more conscious of this power gives people a greater ability to attract desired outcomes, from the most mundane to the most profound. The converse of this principle is that people can do just as much good by learning to recognize the negative social effects of Intent that their own conflicts bring into existence. If enough people realized the impact of indulging in feelings such as fear, despair, or ill-will, the amount of regressive Intent on Earth would lessen dramatically.
Many scenarios in which people today engage in wide-scale social Intent are a matter of a group promoting restrictive conflicts, such as wishing to convert all people to one’s own faith overnight, or desiring to dominate those whom we perceive as a threat or an enemy. Humanity has a clear deficit of the more benevolent, expansive Intent among most social groups, although in every culture, one can encounter groups of people who affirm a spirit of kindness and good will that tips the scales in this direction.
Some people of a metaphysical orientation have formed groups in which they seek to channel their power to positive ends. I cannot say how successful these groups are, since I have never been involved with one myself. I suspect that experiments in collective Intent could be quite powerful, but only if the people involved were in exact agreement on what they sought to produce. If each person’s idea about the objective was slightly different, the projections of each member of the group would not harmonize; it would be little different than Intending on one’s own.
The Potential For Misuse
If this theory is correct, and Intent is a real force in the lives of human beings, the political implications could be staggering. For example, what if a would-be elite learned of fear’s “magnetic” power to attract a specific future? With the right resources and enough knowledge of social consciousness, they could potentially harness the Intent of millions by provoking and directing social emotions. Since fear is such a potent base for Intent projections, inciting widespread terror about a certain future could make desired “negative” events far more likely to happen.
Researchers of secret societies and government “psi” projects have found that elite groups are not always as skeptical of mysticism as many would expect. It is known in some academic circles that secret societies have a long history of engaging in esoteric practices. Intelligence groups in Russia and the US have taken a more scientifically empirical approach, conducting research into the applications of transmaterial awareness, through projects such as telekinesis and remote viewing. The point is, a number of groups that have proven themselves morally corrupt may have hit upon the existence of Intent (those groups involved with the occult are more likely to have explored this, since it is generally viewed as a purely esoteric subject). With such knowledge, an Elite group could attempt to deliberately manipulate a society’s awareness, in order to bring about certain probable futures by enlisting the unwitting public’s power of Intent.
Mechanics Of Programming Intent
An important element in Intending a pattern in our lives—whether it be a personal change, a new direction in one’s life path, or a specific outcome of events—is an ability to “feel” the outcome that one seeks to manifest. This feeling is difficult to describe because, as I have said many times already, the English language does not account for whole areas of human experience and ability. This feeling is like a bodily sense (contrary to pop metaphysics, there is more than just one sense beyond the standard five) that is focused on probabilities. Sensing the future involves all of the physical senses, and an additional element that arises from our innate connection to the Intent underlying all of reality. One can actually “feel” the outcome, projecting one’s consciousness into the experience of a possible course, personal pattern, or event. When we extend this sense into a pattern of destiny, we can feel the pattern as if it were happening in the present moment.
If we simply fixate on the idea of a future outcome, we are missing a key ingredient in the recipe, and the results will probably be insignificant to none. The power of Intent is constantly engaging probabilities, but it is most concentrated in the present moment, for this is the point in time at which we most actively choose our circumstances. We have been taught that there is no point in focusing our conscious will on the future beyond the level of rational planning and present-time action. If we extend the power which we invest in our present decisions into the probabilities of the future, we can make a stronger contribution to what occurs.
Conceptualizing the future as an arrangement of ideas does not directly engage future probabilities; our attention and will stay solidly grounded in the present. This is a hard pattern to break; we have learned that the present is the only pragmatic place to focus our will. When we free some of our will from the present, we can dramatically increase our ability to connect with future probabilities. There is a dual element of perception and application of power involved in this: with perception (intuition), we can get a sense of what is possible, and based on this understanding we can then apply our will to attract or repel certain outcomes.
When we try to Intend, it is important that we also engage our intuition, so that we can assess whether we have a feasible chance of manifesting the Intent that we seek to project, and whether the outcome would truly be positive for all concerned. Intuition is intrinsically connected to the will; “feeling” our connection to a possible pattern goes hand in hand with a feel for its actual likelihood.
Dislodging a portion of our will from its solid focus on the present will not necessarily lead us to become irresponsible or otherwise lose command over our decisions in “Real time.” There are a few safeguards that arise from the innate properties of the will and the ways that we have been taught to program it. For one, the will is like a rubber band: it naturally snaps back into its usual patterns after we have directed it into a less unfamiliar state. The will’s usual attention is also so deep-rooted that even if we redirect a portion of it, the vast majority of its power will almost always remain devoted to our usual patterns.
Self-Doubt
Self-doubt virtually negates the effectiveness of Intent. Any attempt to shape one’s personal power into a pattern of Intent can go awry if one is in a state of anxiety or doubt. The easiest way to suspend doubt is to cultivate a sense of self-righteous confidence, but this method gives the ego more control over the process than many people would like.
Self-righteousness is not suited to performing such a delicate operation (or anything, for that matter) from a place of mindfulness and inner calm. It revolves around a “better-than” perspectives: competitive judgments of worth in which situations are perceived as a race or battle in which there must be a winner and a loser. Condemnations bring a presence of conflict into a projection, and what manifests as a results will reflect this state of imbalance.
All forms of self-righteousness stem from expectations. We only fear to doubt ourselves when we expect that life will prove itself to be the way that we see it in the present moment. When life turns out otherwise, we become sad, frustrated, or angry. If we did not expect ourselves to be totally correct, or expect our plans to go exactly as we had anticipated, or expect other people to act the way we think they should, we would not be disappointed when things turn out differently.
Desire is also involved with the effectiveness of conscious Intent. When we desire for something to happen, we also feel a sense of fear, for we feel that we will not be safe, content, or fulfilled if we don’t get what we want. This fear has an effect similar to doubt: it counteracts any positive Intent that arises from feelings such as determination or hope. When we focus on what we prefer, but do not assume that we will be victims if we do not receive it, we do not project any fear or premature disappointment that would work against our goals; not “caring” is actually the best way to increase the likelihood of an outcome.
Another “don’t” is projecting overly exact or obsessive expectations about how things will turn out. This sends out a message to the Universe that “I will not be satisfied unless I get exactly this.” The more criteria we affix to our Intent, the more restrictions it will have to obey. A general outcome is almost always more probable than a specific one, so clarifying what you don’t need can be an effective way to get what you want. Being overly exact can also distract people from the essence of what they want to accomplish. The key is to Intend that our most basic purpose be fulfilled, without preconceptions about how it should happen.
On Mastery
Some people on Earth have developed their knowledge of Intent to a high degree, and many more are doing so as time moves on. To speak of “mastering” Intent doesn’t indicate a point at which there is no more to learn. Mastery is a state of knowledge and discipline, a point when one can direct Intent deliberately and responsibly.
Since releasing even a small part of one’s full Creative Potential from the ego can give a person a great deal of power to command, people must temper their knowledge with wisdom, or they will waste much of their Intent in fruitless pursuits.
Confirmation: Testing The Theory
Some of the best confirmations come from the seemingly mundane events in our lives. Some people report getting a distinct feeling when a projection of Intent is likely to manifest in their lives. The customary response for those who have been socialized into a materialist worldview is to dismiss these feelings as nonsense and go about their day. If, instead, we pay close attention to what our Abstract awareness intuits, we can recognize the manifestation of Intent when it arrives shortly after.
One of the most effective ways to make Intent more evident is learning to see its presence in the consistency of patterns in our lives. This is something like James Redfield’s prescription for learning to recognize psychic energy dynamics by noticing our own “control dramas:” in learning to perceive something which occurs all the time and works against our growth, we can access new tools to redefine our most limiting patterns.
INTENT AND SOCIAL PARADIGMS
In the last few sections, I explained some ways that beliefs about reality, destiny, and our own identity can affect these areas of each of our lives. Intent obeys our beliefs, shaping the boundaries of what we can perceive and accomplish. I also spoke of way that people can affect each other’s identity, for better or worse, through Intent that is attached to beliefs about who they are. I have already explained the dynamics of this force within the psyches
of individuals; this section will focus on Intent’s impact on the consciousness of large groups of people.
The Nature Of Reality
Intent is the force responsible for creating realities. Reality, in this sense, can encompass far more than the laws of a single world; a reality can be as minute as a certain perception of oneself, or as immense as an entire way of experiencing the world that is shared by millions of beings. The world that most people perceive as real, with all of its possibilities and impossibilities, is not the reality; it is a comprehensive version of existence that people constantly, and unknowingly, uphold with their Intent. The world remains as it seems for so many people because they are Intending that it be so, in conjunction with billions of others.
Humanity’s almost total focus on material reality, and our usual ignorance of levels of existence, has a few main sources. First and foremost is socialization (refer back to the idea of reality filters earlier in the text). Socialization restricts the scope of people’s experiences, so that they cannot access other “versions” of reality that have been created through Intent (such as the Australian Dreamtime). This works hand in hand with the massive concentration of homogeneous Intent that human beings over the millennia have channeled into maintaining the world as we know it. For centuries, most people on Earth have applied their Intent toward making the material world exclusively “real” for human beings. Materialism’s predominance over human paradigms has grown over the centuries. The Intent that human beings collectively channel into upholding this worldview has accumulated, creating a powerful “gravity” which draws people’s awareness to stay within certain boundaries.
Other comprehensive realities exist in the universe, which have also been created by Intent and are maintained by same. Some of these are levels of our own Earth, which are available to human consciousness. Earlier, I mentioned that in some cultures, people in religious trances walk on red-hot coals. These people may have found a doorway to another version of what most of us consider “the World.” In other versions, it might be possible to levitate or put one’s hand through a wall.
People learn to conform to the predominant consensus on what is “real” through a process of socialized entrainment. As people grow up, they are repeatedly told that they can only perceive certain things in certain ways. They are prodded to maintain an increasingly complex worldview that matches up with their parents’ and peers’ perception of reality. Others implicitly communicate that in order to be happy and productive, one must observe specific boundaries of experience. After a given point in a person’s life, one automatically Intends the version of the World that fits the ruling consensus on what is real, and loses all but the smallest capacity to experience alternate versions of reality.
A worldview is a kind of reality. What each person perceives as “The World” encompasses perceptions of themselves and others, basic laws of reality, and any beliefs about the metaphysical aspects of life. People exist in “the World” because they maintain specific patterns of Intent. To reiterate, most of these patterns aren’t original or unique; they are aligned with the Intent of all the other people on Earth who share one’s perceptions of reality.
Paradigms Of Humanity
Each person’s beliefs about humanity as a whole have a direct influence on the collective awareness of the human race. Individually, the beliefs would not have any significant effect on the whole, but when millions or billions of people are involved, the effect is proportionately immense. Since most people on Earth believe that human beings are defined by certain boundaries (such as five-sensory perception), a powerful collective Intent exists which establishes these boundaries as the global standard, or the basal paradigm, of the human race. Isolated pockets of humanity exist which maintain different worldviews, but the vast majority of people on the planet uphold the same basic set of boundaries.
A by-product of this globally projected “mass” of Intent is a pseudo-conscious force called the Collective Ego of humanity. The Collective Ego is a manifestation of many attributes shared by most of the human race—among them, each person’s desire to hold on to certain internal boundaries for the sake of security. It is a Mass Projection of people’s fear of change.
The Mass Consciousness
The Mass Consciousness is a trans-material level of this world. The energy of every human belief system is stored within this “place.” As each of us maintains a certain paradigm about reality and human identity, we project a conscious energy that is assimilated into the mass consciousness.
When a group of people shares certain beliefs, the power of each member of the group becomes part of a mass of energy brought about by the Intent to maintain their paradigm at a social level. This energy becomes akin to a conscious force which seeks to maintain the belief system of those who project it. Since these forces represent a collective Intent, they will be called Mass Paradigm Projections (or Mass Projections for short).
Mass Paradigm Projections
Mass Paradigm Projections consist of two counterparts: sentient energy and Intent. The energetic aspect of a Mass Projection is made up of all the thoughts, emotions, and states of perception of each person who projects it. This energy is projected into the Etheric field of the Earth, and is assimilated, in much the same way that a cell absorbs the particles that sustain it. The Intent aspect represents the combined Intent of all the people who seek to maintain a certain paradigm of reality.
The basic command behind the Intent of a Mass Projection is to maintain the preconceptions of those who project it. To carry out this objective, it influences awareness on a wide scale (especially that of the society with which it is associated), affects the course of events on Earth, and shapes the very nature of reality.
Remember, a Mass Projection of Intent isn’t simply a random assortment of thoughts; in a sense, it is an entire reality. The world of a Christian may, at an external level, look exactly like the world of a Hindu, but when it comes to the two people’s beliefs about the unseen, or about why things happen the way they do, they are in totally different realities. The “World” of one person’s awareness of transcendent affairs is just as valid as that of the other, in the sense that they both experience their religious beliefs as completely real; according to this theory, the course of each person’s life not only validates his belief in forces which guide his destiny, but emulates it.
The fact that both the Christian and the Hindu are aligned with the basal Intent of material reality allows them to perceive and interact with one another. Unless they are very open-minded about other faiths, however, neither person will be able to comprehend the experience of the other’s religion, because they will not perceive that person’s religious reality as legitimate. They are on “different wavelengths,” existing in parallel, yet separate, realities.
When a person believes in the tenets of a religion, a vast portion of his or her view of the “Real World” corresponds to this Faith. If we are talking about one of the major world religions, such as Islam, a person is obviously not alone in the religious aspects of his or her worldview; millions of others are loyal to the same belief system. Each of these people projects a complex pattern of Intent that upholds their faith; this widespread agreement on what is real and true manifests a societal Intent that is far more powerful than that of any one individual.
Projection gravity
The Intent of a powerful Mass Projection compels people to conform to its underlying social paradigms. As people get drawn in by this tractor beam, they become entrained in the vibrational patterns—the basic paradigm—that the Projection represents. The degree to which people are influenced by Mass Projections depends on factors such as how aligned their personal beliefs are with those of the projection, which energy projections in their environment are most powerful, and how susceptible their beliefs are to outside pressure. People must have a certain critical mass of shared elements of consciousness to come heavily under the influence of a Mass Projection’s Intent. There are many other significant factors, such as how much someone feel a sense of with the group that upholds those elements of the Projection.
Third Density Mass Paradigm Projections possess a specific kind of Etheric “gravity.” These great entities are not conscious, per se, but they can exert as much pressure on our awareness as the people around us. Because of all of the Intent that has been invested in them over time, these Projections magnetize the awareness of those who express some of the patterns that they encompass.
The meaning of free will is difficult to pin down when it comes to such forces; people may seem to be controlled and fueled by them, but there is a two-way dynamic. Inequality between the Projection (or paradigm) and the individual is compounded by people being unaware of this relationship. Consider that for much of our history, most of humanity has been anchored by the Mass Projection of what some call Third Density consciousness. All the while, people have been unaware that it is their own Creative Power which maintains the worldview’s prevalence as a Mass Projection.
Mass Projections As An Energy Source
Much of the vital energy that human beings receive comes from neutral sources—that is, sources which are not infused with any particular belief system or emotional state. In the last chapter, I discussed a number of neutral energy sources, such as sunlight, the Earth, and a non-material level of one’s being which I call one’s creative source. These neutral sources could provide every human being with an abundance of vital energy, but the conditions in our societies make this nearly impossible. Most people are partially disconnected from the most pure, natural sources of creative energy by inner conflict, fixation, scattered attention, and many of the other factors that I have discussed. To compensate for this deficit, people draw on the energy around them for vital energy.
When people do have a clear enough connection to these natural sources of vital energy, they are compelled to turn to other sources for “sustenance,” and Third Density Mass Projections have an abundant supply. Unconsciously, people who experience a deficiency of energy “tune” themselves to whatever surrounding energy source is closest to their own vibrational state; generally, this is the energy one or more Mass Paradigm Projections that many of the people around us uphold. A local Mass Projection is an incredibly rich source of ambient energy, and all that it takes us to absorb the energy contained in one of these fields is that we align ourselves with some of its central beliefs.
Like a secret club in which you have to say certain code words to enter, people can only gain access to the energy of a Projection if certain patterns of Etheric energy are represented in their awareness. It is similar to dealing with another person; unless you are on the same Etheric wavelength, so to speak, you will not be able to attune yourself to—and thus, understand—much of their personal reality. Mass Projections can be likened to signals emitted by different radio stations, some of which are more powerful than others. When a person “tunes in” to the station that matches her own belief system, she not only becomes an antenna for that signal, but a new power source.
People do not always take on the whole of a Mass Projection; it may be that most people on Earth are affiliated with a number of different projections. If a person is open only to a certain portion of a Projection’s beliefs, they will only tune in to specific levels of the Mass. Since Intent connects all of the concepts into a whole (however grotesque or convoluted), other ideas carry over to some extent.
By tuning in to a Third Density projection, people are able to take in some of the energy that others have invested in that projection. By doing so, people can incorporate, into their own being, any feelings that underlie the worldview, such as self-confidence or victimhood. However, this energy has a price: the more we become aligned with a Mass Projection, the more dependent we become on its energy. In the process, we cease to be our own “projection station,” with the freedom to choose our own “signal.”
Most Mass Projections in the world are founded in Third Density worldviews. Since aligning with a Mass Projection demands that our awareness vibrate at a level which is compatible with that of the projection’s worldview, we must maintain a dualistic state of awareness in order to draw from the energy of a Third Density Mass Projection, while also being saturated with its most conflict-ridden components.
People who orient their awareness around a Third Density level of awareness can not establish a clear connection with their creative source. The conflict and duality inherent in Third Density consciousness put a constant drain on the energy that people naturally derive from the neutral energy sources available to them. One’s energy level is constantly stunted by the psychic atmosphere of fear, competition, and inequality. This internal and external environment causes people to become disconnected from their creative source, and whatever energy they do have is restricted by emotional conflict.
We will not be able to experience even a portion of our potential energy level until we confront the aspects of our consciousness which are responsible for our sense of separation and conflict. This process entails shifting one’s worldview closer to a Fourth Density frame of reference. The more we grow as people, the more our energy flows directly from the creative source, for the highest attributes of human character are Etherically aligned with the same level of being which is the wellspring of our creative energy.
Mass Projections seem to have no spatial limitations; they can encompass the whole Earth, or just a small village in a rain forest somewhere. They concentrate their power according to the number of people in an area who resonate with their core worldview’s basic elements.
The War Of Paradigms
Underlying all Third Density paradigms are the purposes of the ego: pleasure, comfort, stability, and self-preservation. The “societal ego” behind a Third Density paradigm is a macrocosmic manifestation of these drives.
In Mass Projections which are based on a third-density model of human existence, the ego is usually a powerful driving force. The pseudo-conscious Intent that constitutes this projection will dutifully emulate the program of its psychic source: it will constantly attempt to defend its existence from change, and will seek to “prove” its superiority over other paradigms through an approach of forceful domination.
When a projection is created by a group of people who are oriented toward fourth-density awareness, the “character” of this entity is likely to be quite different. A Fourth Density belief system, ideally, embodies the purposes of the higher self or actualized self archetype: growth, exploration, expansion, and integration. These aims, by their essence, contradict and ultimately nullify those of the ego. The same principle applies when fear-oriented projections interact with those which arise from expansive “higher” emotions. Whereas ego-oriented projections are conservative by nature—trying to defend a fixed paradigm—higher self-oriented projections seek to ensure that a social paradigm evolves toward new levels of completion.
In the penultimate sense, the purposes of these two types of Projections two density levels are diametrically opposed. This may explain why these kinds of worldviews seem to have waged constant war with one another for as long as they have both held some prevalence in human populations. A paradigm war can be a battle of people, groups, or societies; it occurs when more than one paradigm tries to establish itself as “ruler” of the mass consciousness.
A war of paradigms of immense proportions—a battle between the third and Fourth Density basal paradigms—is currently raging in the mass consciousness of humanity. Contrary to some separatist portrayals of humanity’s situation, the majority of the human race is not completely oriented toward the former or the latter mode of awareness; most people on Earth exist somewhere in between the two.
This paradigm war has been going on since before known history, and may even have begun in other levels of consciousness before there was an evolved material universe. Running through the history of human civilization, there has been a waxing and waning struggle between the archetypal forces of the ego and the higher self. At this point in our history, this struggle is reaching a zenith; the balance is due to shift dramatically in either direction.
There are certain strategies which each side has used in its effort to conquer the other. Intent projections reflect the consciousness of those who project them, and employ some of the same strategies. Few people actually epitomize one side of the other (though in this author’s experience, a few come pretty close). A Third Density Mass Projection attempts to dominate rivaling Fourth Density projections by trying to drag them into its own frame of reference, then uses the seductive quality of the security, pleasure, and empowerment which its belief systems offer to gradually redefine the rivaling paradigm in an ego-based image. If this fails, another strategy is to simply use its superior position of power in the mass consciousness to beat the rivaling projection into submission.
Fourth Density paradigms are, by their very nature, non-aggressive, so their style of self-preservation is oriented largely toward defense. As with those who uphold them, there are times when they come into opposition. There are two ways that a Fourth Density Mass Projection can respond to the attacks of an ego-based projection; it can either react with the same fear-based violence that motivates its antagonists, or maintain the integrity of its original (higher self-based) Intent. In a best-case scenario, they remain strong in the face of any onslaughts without becoming mired in dualistic consciousness. On the other end of the spectrum, the group responsible for the projection becomes full of fear and antagonism. The “defensive” action of a Mass Projection directly mirrors those who uphold its root paradigm; its success (in terms of maintaining its integrity amidst antagonistic Intent) completely depends on the inner strength of those who responsible for its existence.
If what began as a Fourth Density Mass Projection becomes overwhelmed by conflict (as a reflection of those who uphold it), any apparent success against competing paradigms is a hollow victory. Even if it seems that the paradigm behind the projection has succeeded in achieving greater precedence than rivaling belief systems, the integrity of its original Intent will have been lost in the process of defending itself.
Things play out very differently when a Fourth Density paradigm challenges achieves more of a social base without losing its original ideals in the process. Those who uphold a higher-self-oriented paradigm without compromising their clarity, compassion or equanimity can develop into a powerful group of people. Because the members of this group are impeccably projecting and maintaining their belief system, they create a Mass Projection which is not easily subdued by the dominant Third Density paradigms.
As people continue to free themselves from the most widely accepted restrictions of understanding, an ever greater number strengthen Fourth Density worldviews with the Intent of their conviction. As more expansive paradigms grow in strength, their ideals begin to pervade the Mass Projections of the ruling paradigms. (This passive approach is the Fourth Density equivalent to an “offensive maneuver.”)
As Fourth Density paradigms develop a stronger support base in social consciousness, they become more widely recognized as an option for awareness. Intent plays a part in this. Through the same form of gravitation which has magnetized the global majority to the Third Density worldview, people who begin to explore beyond third-density boundaries of awareness find it easier to anchor themselves in more expansive modes of awareness. At a social level, as more people emulate the ideals and values contained in the Fourth Density basal paradigm, societies will recognize restrictive aspects of their social paradigms and work to change them accordingly.
As people “tune in” to Fourth Density projections in the Earth’s Etheric field, they direct their Intent to increase the power of these more expansive modes of knowing. This is very different from the cycle through which Third Density belief structures are absorbed, projected, and reinforced. One factor in this is that people who are centered in higher self consciousness have a steady connection to the trans-dimensional source of their creative energy.
Human consciousness is not centered completely in the physical body, as many people believe; we exist simultaneously in various levels of reality. What we perceive as our identity doesn’t constitute all that we are; it is only a level of our attention that is so tightly focused as to be all-consuming for the aspect of oneself that is immersed in it. Many people have studied the concept of subtle realms which parallel the material world and the subtle “bodies” (emotional, mental, astral, etc.) that human beings maintain in each of these levels; there are also levels of human identity that are centered in alternate realities.
The ego is firmly grounded in material reality; it arises mainly from processes in the brain and body working in conjunction with the three main subtle bodies (mental, emotional, astral). The higher self, on the other hand, is largely centered in alternate realities that are sometimes referred to as higher dimensions. These realities are the main source of the creative energy that sustains human consciousness on all levels.
When people are dominated by fear-based dualities, their awareness is centered in the physical body, and they are cut off from the higher forms of sentient energy that provide creative nourishment. Human beings are meant to exist in a multi-dimensional state, in which they are focused on their physical surroundings, yet are aligned with the alternate reality from which humans’ creative energy flows. The human ability to align multiple realities at once allows us to act as portals through which Higher-emotional energy flows “down” into our physical reality.
The physical world is currently filled with a great deal of fear-based emotional energy. Aligning with the higher self changes this situation in two ways: it brings higher emotions into the physical level of this reality through the portal of the mind/Etheric body, and it actually draws physical reality closer to a state of alignment with the higher dimensions in which fear-based projections have less power. There are physical places on the Earth right now whose substance has somehow become aligned with alternate levels of reality. Those with an unusually expansive perception of their reality can intentionally use these sacred places as a springboard into alternate states of consciousness.
The more people learn to access the power of their creative source, the more they learn to be empowered by their own beliefs. This gradual transition is ideal for weaning oneself off of the energy of Mass Projections. Freeing oneself from this addictive cycle doesn’t mean losing our connection to all of the beliefs contained in the projections that are closest to us; it means learning to isolate only those elements of other paradigms that have been most real and true in our experiences. As people become more responsible for generating their own worldviews, they retain the ability to contribute to the power of specific belief systems by choice.
Different types of Mass Projections have distinct characteristics. Most large Third Density Projections are maintained by rational control structures that reflect the ego’s need for the security of restrictions. The “quintessential” Fourth-density Mass Projection, in contrast, conveys the basic Intent of the human spirit: to facilitate evolution toward a more ideal and unlimited state. The most pure of these societal Projections draw their cohesiveness from people who are centered in higher-emotional ideals.
Those who uphold Third Density paradigms must depend on tuning in to rigid, restrictive belief systems that have already been established. The Intent behind their allegiance is firmly based in the emotion of fear—of change, of being beaten, or of the loss of security. Fourth Density awareness, in sharp contrast to this definition, is based on the Intent of fluidity and progression. It is not primarily belief oriented; it is a state of mind in which can more freely move and expand.
On Making An Impact
The “war of paradigms” is not removed from us; it is not simply an abstraction. It is a direct reflection of how we perceive ourselves, each other, and the world in which we live. Our awareness, our sense of purpose, have an impact on the patterns of Intent that surround us. The conflict between the regression and evolution of knowledge manifests on the interpersonal, social, and global level, but we learn to understand it, and choose which qualities we will emulate, in our minds and hearts.
The difficulties that we see in our society are macrocosms of a conflict within the human identity that our race has not yet resolved at a collective level. Until human beings learn to achieve balance and integration within the self, we will not solve the conflicts which we perceive in the world around us.
Intending New Social Paradigms
Since the so-called “dawn of civilization,” the Third Density worldview has dominated the consciousness of humankind. However, we have reached a pivotal juncture in the our collective evolution; for the first time in millennia, influences in the mass consciousness are approaching a relative balance between the ego and higher self archetypes. Partly as a cause of this—and partly as a result—third and Fourth Density paradigms are competing for dominance over the mass consciousness of the human race more aggressively than ever before.
Humanity has advanced—and continues to progress—to a point at which many people know how to engage the fields of energy and Intent of the collective unconscious. When people explore metaphysical capabilities, they types of energy and forms of perception that are not part of the predominant consensus. The number of people who utilize transmaterial capabilities seems to have been on a downward slide over recent millennia; the numbers have declined through aggressive socialization, enculturation of societies with different worldviews, and genocide (there have been many examples of this in North and Central America ever since Europeans discovered this hemisphere). Colonization of indigenous cultures has also had the effect of ethnocide—the intentional destruction of a significant portion of a culture’s heritage—through religious conversions, political control, and commercialization.
The West, strange as it may seem, has produced a great amount of metaphysical activity in the last half-century. Westerners’ style of mystical experimentation differs from the common patterns that arise in indigenous societies: it is less grounded in faith, more focused on results, and inexorably tied to the multifaceted “pop culture” that has arisen to champion it.
As more people learn of, and dabble in, metaphysical paradigms of human ability, they play a part in changing the Western “baseline” for awareness, and acceptance, of alternative paradigms. Some people have gone past the dabbling stage, and have explored advanced techniques of directing their consciousness. These people play a part of grounding their knowledge in the collective unconscious. The object is to make the less conventional states more available to all people—closer to baseline.
The rising popularity of metaphysical paradigms is occurring through a synergistic relationship: as more people add to the “gravity” of evolutionary paradigms, more people are able to move into a range of consciousness at which they can comprehend their ability to do the same. By Intending that fourth-density awareness becomes a more prevalent mode of understanding, one amplifies Fourth Density worldviews’ power in the mass consciousness. Mastering the Intent of paradigms allows one to play an instrumental role in deposing the dualistic states of perception that have been the human norm for so long.
In my opinion, the catalyst for a paradigm shift will probably not be contact with Aliens, nor the establishment of a New World Order, nor the cataclysms predicted in Revelations. The greatest source of change will be individual people engaged in a united effort to implement a more holistic base for human awareness. There is also something to be said for those who champion the extremely dualistic “reactionary” models.
In this time of rapidly evolving awareness, many people have begun to realize that they not only have the power to continually expand their understanding, accepting or rejecting aspects of different worldviews according to their best discretion. Human beings also have the capacity to directly change the basis and prevalence of ruling worldviews, thus co-facilitating social evolution toward a more holistic understanding. People who have a strong desire for humanity to shift in the direction of evolutionary ideals contributes to this change by intending that such a shift in consciousness occur.
It should be noted, however, that understanding the power of Intent does not justify a stance of apathy toward bringing about change in a more tangible, results-oriented sense. Those who seek to play active roles in the evolution of belief systems and social structures must, first and foremost, do so through activity in the “real world.”
Turning The Tables
There are many ways that people can use to affect the Projections that are most connected to them. One technique is based on the idea of “reverse engineering” the process through which one becomes anchored to a Mass Projection. The human will is powerful enough to pull a Projection into entrainment with a more expansive set of parameters, if we consciously direct it to do so. This reverses the process through which Mass Projections hold our consciousness intact; instead of being anchored within a restrictive set of options, we turn the tables and actually anchor the projection to alternate characteristics which we try to cultivate in ourselves.
A prerequisite to achieving this advanced form of Intent manipulation is that we learn to fragment our identity in such a way that part of us is immersed in the limits of a worldview, yet another part—what can be called the integral self—retains a level of understanding at which we can clearly perceive those very limitations. Once this consciousness has been established, the trick is to become aware of the specific realizations that allow our awareness to progress from the confinements of Point A to the more expansive perspectives at Point B. Empowering these realizations must be the main focus of one’s attention for the technique to succeed.
We won’t accomplish much by saying “Alacazam, everyone evolve;” we must draw on our inner resources and empower the realizations that dispel restrictive belief systems. Consciously empowering key realizations creates pathways out of a restrictive paradigm, which others can then use to evolve. As people directly Intend that these realizations become more powerful, they build bridges that will be available for others to cross over into a broader understanding. Recognizing that these bridges exist allows people to overcome the hopeless certainty that there is “no way out” of regressive patterns.
As people cross these certain thresholds in understanding, they clear a path to alternate ways of experiencing one’s world. These options become more prevalent in the mass consciousness, making them more available to others. In this, we find one version of what has been called the Hundredth Monkey Effect. The more people walk a path, the wider and more clearly defined that path becomes. Eventually, more and more people are able to see the pathways out of the inner cages that we had learned to accept, and it much easier to make those transitions than it would have been years before.
When people have ongoing experiences with entrainment in a way of being or perceiving, yet are learning to progress beyond those limits, their struggles have subtle aftershocks that carry over to other people in the world who are also focused on those challenges. People who are “anchored” to the affected societal worldview, yet find that not all of its boundaries match up with their ideals, will find that many “escape routes” out of out of their paradigmatic prison are well-trodden, illuminated roads rather than dark, scary paths in the woods.
Using Intent to clear pathways in the Mass Consciousness allows us to play an instrumental role in changing the basis for human understanding. The power of such techniques is further compounded when people practice them in groups with a unified Intention. Many people do not take groups of “New Agers” who practice communal or global meditations seriously, yet in many cases, these people’s efforts may have a substantial influence over developments in social structures and belief systems. A greater collective alignment to this end could exert an incredible impact on the prevalence of social (Western) and global consciousness.
Here we begin to see a major purpose of the cycle of being repeatedly pulled into chronic, regressive patterns of awareness. As we are “forced” by circumstance to clarify different lessons and transitions in our own lives, our awareness becomes a microcosm of certain pathways of growth that are occurring in social consciousness.
Other Thoughts To Consider
Throughout this essay, I have stressed the importance of being aware of biases that influence our Intent. When people let this slip, they we face the possibility of evoking changes based on egoistic interests, along with all of the ramifications that their decisions could bring. This is true for socially directed Intent as well.
For example, if you enjoy eating broccoli, and feel bad for people who don’t appreciate broccoli like you do, it would be selfish to try to get everybody else to “realize” how great broccoli is. Enjoying broccoli is not what’s best for everyone; people have different tastes, and are meant to work within the framework of those tastes. To intentionally upset that framework would be a violation of the choices the other person has made, and could throw the Intender’s path seriously off-course.
It is another thing altogether to recognize that all people can achieve the state of intense appreciation that you experience while eating broccoli, by eating their own favorite foods. In a more general context, any intense appreciation for a certain flavor and texture is a good thing, even if it isn’t the same as our own. In this vein, consciously empowering a certain potential must be a matter of finding the common ideals which unite all of the people who fall within the scope of one’s Intent.
Some people who have exerted a strong influence over human societies, have covertly believed that they understand esoteric principles. Knowing about the mechanics through which Intent affects the prevalence of worldviews would give a group a great asset to controlling human societies. Any time people use knowledge for egoistic ends, they dig themselves a little bit deeper; they pay for it with obsession of power and a constant, subdued yet all-inclusive, fear of being powerless. We must be careful, even if we mean well, not to fall into the same trap by irresponsibly using what we know.
The “Silver Lining” Of Recurring Boundaries
A social paradigm, like a personal one, is maintained by Intent. Because the most popular worldviews on Earth right now are based upon many anti-progressive beliefs and emotional states, they have effectively formed a vibrational barrier that makes more expansive thoughtforms and higher-emotional states difficult to access—not only for the “members” of these paradigms, but for humanity in general.
As I said at the beginning of this section, the underlying Intent of specific Mass Projections has established Third Density awareness as the predominant frequency range with which most human beings are aligned. However, there a growing number of people are coming to grasp alternatives to this model, such as a resisting the urge to fixate on lower emotions or perceiving nonmaterial capacities like Etheric energy and probability fields. Among these pioneers of Fourth Density paradigms, a large number of people seem to vacillate between restrictive and expansive paradigms more than they are firmly grounded in one or the other, and many actually find themselves operating from various paradigms at the same time—with each fragment believing that it is their “real” identity.
Many paradigm pioneers find themselves repeatedly drawn back into perspectives, roles and emotional states which they thought they had overcome. Many people report the same pattern occurring and recurring in their lives. First we come to recognize social belief systems that limit our understanding, and intend to expand beyond those boundaries. Eventually we reach a point at which it seems we have established a firmer, more genuine sense of identity that is not as subject to the “ups and downs” of egoistic duality. By remaining centered in this integral self, we can examine areas of conflict and confusion in the psyche with renewed objectivity, instead of habitually becoming arrogant or self-deprecating when we encounter unpleasant aspects of our total being.
However, the elation of this objective clarity does not last. Right at the moment that everything seems to be going smoothly, and we begin to revel in our ability to effortlessly confront inner obstacles, we find our consciousness being pulled back into reality-tunnels that we were sure we’d “transcended” months or even years ago. We find ourselves inexplicably drawn back into identity projections that we had once adhered to; instead of being our usual serene, ebullient and insightful self, we feel anxious, dissatisfied, and narrow-minded. Despite our best efforts to fight the process, we are dominated by the old way of being. Eventually, the spell passes, but not before leaving us much less confident in our own ability to grow.
We may valiantly struggle between the “gravity” of the invading worldviews and the aspect of ourselves that tries to remain anchored in preferred ideals such as courage (of the non-martyr type) and joy. Still, once we regain our sense of an integral self, we find ourselves sucked a new batch of restrictive thought patterns. So, why is this happening? What is the purpose, if any, of inexplicably losing our strength of will and being dominated by beliefs and states of mind that we could deal with much more responsibly from the “command center” of the hard-won integral self?
Lapsing in and out of our highest ideals could come about from any number of things; being both an optimist and a cynic, I tend to think that there is a purpose, but that its delivery is not always fun. Intense experience with specific limitations offer us valuable experience in the “field” of facilitating paradigm shifts.
When we are “sucked” into a restrictive worldview, yet can retain an awareness of a more conscious aspect of our identity, we gain insight into the process of “getting from point A to point B” that we could not grasp if we simply held on to point B—our highest ideal—and viewed the more limited fragments of ourselves from “on high.”
In particular, the experience of being the “lowlier” aspects of ourselves is an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of the process of metamorphosis from the “lower,” more restrictive state to the “higher,” more expansive one. If we simply say “Oh, I’ve already dealt with that psychic garbage; now I can move on to better things,” we will miss the subtler aspects of transition from one worldview to another. Being forced, more or less, to go through these transitions numerous times allows us to grasp many nuances of a specific kind of paradigm shift that we could not have noticed in one go.
Some people pooh-pooh lessons that focus on “lower” aspects of the psyche, such as reptilian and lower-mammalian conflicts, in favor of pursuing more transcendental knowledge. Dealing with the junk-heap of the collective unconscious is often a smelly, unpleasant affair, but we should not underestimate the importance of such work; these aspects of human awareness are at the crux of most of humanity’s current paradigmatic dilemmas, including—though they’re often loath to admit it—dedicated paradigm pioneers.
As we repeatedly undergo shifts in consciousness from limited worldviews to expansive ones, and then back to another limited one, we develop a much clearer sense of identification with each respective worldview. They begin to seem like familiar territory; we are no longer so immersed in one or two worldviews that we perceive others as separate and inferior.
Some people aspire to perennially stay centered in a perfect, enlightened state. Perhaps some of them pull it off, or come close enough that no one knows the difference, but for many people I have known, the goal of perfection is a source of much unnecessary conflict. By expecting things to go a certain way, we set ourselves up for either being completely elated or completely let down. If our experience does not fit our lofty ideals, we assume that they “went wrong” somewhere along the line, and immediately try to fix the problem. This dualistic problem-solution outlook can prevent us from understanding why, at times, we suddenly find ourselves overcome by oppressive thought patterns.
The process of being continually “pulled” by restrictive identity projections, while attempting to retain the integrity of an expansive and balanced understanding, gradually leads one’s sense of identity to differentiate itself into distinct archetypal patterns of ignorance and knowledge. Consciousness becomes more clearly divided into a single source self, which represents our most refined ideals, and numerous identity fragments, each of which represents certain limiting, regressive beliefs. As we learn to juggle these fragments, recognizing that each of them is a conscious “I,” while continually referring back to the ever-expanding source self, we begin to orchestrate, within our own consciousness, the fundamental shifts in awareness which the human race is collectively grappling with.
I cannot overemphasize the importance of recognizing the validity of each fragment’s consciousness. The norm for human consciousness has historically been to arrange their worldview in terms of the world, the self, and everything in between, with “I” being the true self. This doesn’t mean that a person’s perception of I is not capable of change and growth; a person who is operating from the one-self perspective can integrate aspects of other worldviews into one’s own, which then become a part of I. However, the one-self view of identity has an infinitely limiting drawback; a person cannot recognize that other “I’s” are also his or her “true” self. By the same token, an individual who perceives himself as a single personal lives in perpetual denial that other I’s exist somewhere in the vast universe that is his psyche, and thus, he represses fragments of his identity that are incongruous with his current view of his “true self.”
When people begin to recognize that various selves exist in their total being which are “conscious” and “true” in their own right, their understanding broadens to a multi-dimensional perception of identity. This word might remind some readers of other material about higher states of consciousness, while the idea might sound like a case of multiple personalities, but most human beings are in this state all the time. Achieving a multi-level perception of oneself is simply a matter of noticing a fragmentation that was there to begin with. For instance, imagine that, in your early childhood, your father often scolded you for doing things that you thought were justified. As a result of this, you developed a deep-set defensiveness about criticism that could now lead you to disregard well-meaning advice from someone else in your life. If you thought of yourself from a totally uni-persona viewpoint, you might look back and think “it was silly of me to get mad; I’m more mature now,” and consider the matter resolved; you would think of your childhood self as a different person from the present you.
In order to preserve the conviction that your present self is your “true” self, you would rationalize your superiority to your childhood identity, preserving the sense that your current self is “ true” and “real,” and the past self “false” and “unreal.” If you are thinking multi-dimensionally, on the other hand, you might look back on your childhood and recognize that the aspect of you then that seethed with anger over being criticized too much is still alive and well somewhere in your psyche. With this awareness in mind, you would be more able to take responsibility for that fragment of yourself, perhaps recognizing the way that it manifests in your current self as a resistance to others’ advice.
Our energy and Intent gradually become more focused and balanced as we explore fragments of our identity which are trapped in restrictive thought patterns and owning them as part of ourselves. The only way to do this is to continually strengthen our sense of an integral self. As we repeatedly overcome those boundaries, we find ourselves in a state in which part of our being is anchored in archetypal forms of ignorance while another aspect is anchored in a further stage of those thought patterns’ evolution. Out of the in the medley of Paradigm Pioneers in the World, many people are of the Jungian notion that the scattered fragments of the psyche are working toward a state of indivisible wholeness. There is merit to this idea, but in my opinion, even those who aspire to an “ultimate” unity should not focus on the to the idea of absolutes so much that they lose sight of what they can accomplished now—or even soon.
Once again, why can people who seek to expand their minds find no permanent peace? Why habitually find their sense of self partially divided among warring, tangential or aimless identity fragments, holding on by a thread to a sense of their Integral Self, which possesses the clarity to address their inner conflict with clarity and emotional balance. As this Integral Self becomes more firmly established, however, a purpose is unfolding: having “one foot” in one particular worldview and the other foot in another, then a third foot in yet another worldview (at the risk of exhausting the metaphor) gives them the ability to actually Intend the evolution of various Mass Projections toward a more holistic worldview base.
There is not a single higher worldview that everyone would be able to accept in the near future. Even if there were, for human beings to try to evolve so rapidly could be disastrous, because the mentality is too close to violent paradigms such as fascism and nationalism. Most people do not completely have a handle on the concept of “viable peace,” and if society became too eager to create something that looks peaceful and unified, it might lose its grasp on the essence of the idea. Each distinct worldview can, however, evolve in its own way, and as each of them expands to encompass more knowledge, they move closer to on another. There are common truths that could bring many worldviews to a level playing field, if only they became a little more open.
The basic process of Intending worldview progression involves deliberately embodying the aspects of ourselves that are trapped in restrictive ways of seeing things. If we do not fear “the other” in ourselves—that which does not fit our conscious ideals—we can recognize that “it” is “I” and that it needs our attention in order to evolve. At the same time, however, we must keep our focus partly divided, remaining conscious of the personal insights that, time and time again, have allowed us to break out of the reality-tunnels of the worldview that we are wrestling with. We must then clearly “visualize” (I’m falling back on this term, even though the process is more a matter of feeling, conceptualization, and “senses” that have not been recognized by orthodox science) the specific realizations that the restricted fragment needs to evolve, and then, as the fragment, Intend that we integrate those realizations into our consciousness.
This process is very tricky, because in order for it to work, the fragment of ourselves that we—as the integral self—want to “help” must be in agreement with our Intent; otherwise, the fragment will resist the process, and will build up defenses that might make things even more complicated the next time we try. It’s better, at least for the inexperienced, to only apply this advanced form of self-transformation to those aspects of ourselves that are partly inclined to evolve beyond given boundaries but need the conscious mind’s assistance to do so. The same principle applies to the process of intending evolution in a social Mass Projection. In this macrocosmic model, fragments that resist change are represented by the people who are least willing, or least prepared, to discard certain limiting perspectives. That some circles of the metaphysical movement promote “converting” others to Fourth Density models of consciousness is partly accountable for the fact that such a powerful resistance to these ideas has developed.
We cannot realistically expect to “yank everyone into the New Age;” what we can do is to empower patterns of social thought which are primed for progression, while strengthening and widening the pathways of this evolution through consciously applied Intent. This is largely what James Redfield meant in The Tenth Insight when he spoke of “holding the vision.” As this work is done by more and more people, those who actually seek to explore beyond the boundaries of their social worldviews will find that the pathways are open. These people, in turn, will illustrate the more “moderate” example of individuals who have partly transitioned to more holistic paradigms, making others aware that this is possible without seeming too “far out” for most people’s tolerance.
Intending Worldview Evolution
By learning to consciously command Intent, it is possible to directly affect social paradigms. The process by which we accomplish this is a macrocosm of the process through which we intend a change in our own understanding. To extend the personal paradigm shift Intent technique to encompass social worldviews, we must sink the “teeth” of our awareness and Intent very deep into the area of the mass consciousness that we seek to affect. Otherwise, we will only be bringing about personal change, with little more than an ineffectual hope that social consciousness will change as well. A beginning step in facilitating the progression of social paradigms is to focus one’s attention on a specific source of conflict or limited perspective in the matrix of social consciousness. One must first become aware of the belief systems which are the source of the conflict, and then focus on the insights which can resolve it. Next, one must clarify—and deliberately amplify—the insights that can resolve the obstacle. To do this, we need to draw from out own experiences. Because of this, the greatest learning occurs in our own understanding.
At a metaphysical level, our society exists as a matrix of different aspects of consciousness—such as beliefs, concerns, and life lessons. The strongest patterns are those which are most widely shared. Characteristics that we share with many other people give us a connection to corresponding parts of this social matrix. Our own awareness contains a representation of broader patterns in society; the will and the abstract mind for the link between the personal and collective patterns of Intent. When our own experiences parallel social patterns that are regressive or stagnant, we can use our sense of identification to extend our awareness so that it encompasses the macrocosmic pattern in the mass consciousness. Through the connection of this expansive, generalized empathy, we can infuse the social matrix with a pattern of progression that we seek to cultivate in ourselves. Using our own awareness as a blueprint, we can tap into an aspect of the collective energy of society, and extend our Intent of personal growth to those who are coping with the same learning issues.
DEFINITIONS AND TERMS
Self-image: n. The collection of beliefs which forms a person’s overall view of his or her “true self.” Other names for the self-image are the conscious mind, the personality, etc.
Abstract Self: n. The level(s) of each person’s identity which perceives at a level beyond the physical, five-sensory mode in which most people’s awareness is entrained. Although the Abstract Self is unconscious or barely conscious in most people, all people have the capacity to access this level of their awareness, as evidenced by the commonality of “psychic” or intuitive experiences.
Mass consciousness: A level of reality which contains all of the pseudo-sentient patterns of Intent which are shared by groups of people, or Mass Projections. Could be described as a level of our world, rather than a bona fide alternate reality, though some of the patterns in the Mass consciousness may exist at other planes of existence or in other regions of the physical universe.
Manifestation: n. A process of bringing a visualized course of events to fruition, through the focus of one’s “will” or intent.
Paradigm: n. A set of fundamental beliefs and/or ideals upheld by a person, group, or culture. Example: the post-Columbus belief that the Earth was flat.
Basal paradigm: n. The beliefs and perceptual limits which define the core, or basic framework, of a personal or social belief system. Example: the belief that human perceptions are limited to the five senses of sight, smell, hearing, taste and touch forms the basal Western paradigm of both reality and the human potential.
Third Density: adj. The basal paradigm which describes the perceptual limits and fundamental beliefs of most human beings. The major tenets of this paradigm are:
1. That human beings are not capable of utilizing forms of perception beyond the five physical senses, i.e. sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell.
2. That the physical reality which the majority of human beings perceive is the only reality in existence, and/or the only reality which human beings are capable of perceiving while in the physical body.
3. That human beings did not possess a cohesive sense of individual identity prior to and, in some cases, or preceding, the death of the physical body.
Fourth Density: adj. A basal paradigm which is less common among human beings, but which most human paradigms touch upon in some way. This paradigm encompasses:
1. A belief that all human beings have the capacity to perceive themselves from a transmaterial framework. (see transmaterial.)
2. An awareness of dualistic or limiting emotions, thoughts, and perceptions as aspects of awareness which one is creating or allowing, rather than viewing them as “uncontrollable forces” which are more powerful than one’s will to oppose them.
3. The integration into one’s conscious awareness of perceptual capabilities which exceed the five-sensory range of Third Density awareness. Examples are the direct perception of Etheric energy fields or an intuitive awareness of different probabilities in one’s own destiny.
4. The exploration of ways in which one’s personal beliefs, perceptions, and abilities interact with aspects of reality that are not recognized by Third Density paradigms, but which can be perceived from a Fourth Density level of awareness. Examples are utilizing control of one’s Etheric energy to establish bonds with animals, or learning to consciously project positive emotions in order to establish benign and peaceful communication between oneself and others.
5. Awareness of ways that all things, living and nonliving, interact with one another, within the expanded framework which Fourth Density awareness engenders. Examples are noticing the way that people influence each other by projecting thoughts and emotions at the Etheric level, or of the way that ecosystems function through a psychic communication between all of the animal and plant participants (except humans, in most cases).
Pseudo-conscious or pseudo-sentient: Possessed of some acting ability, but lacking the power of imagination or true free will.
Worldview: A comprehensive way of viewing the world that encompasses basic laws of reality, rational concepts of what is real and true, morals, sources of fear, the existence or nonexistence of unseen aspects of the world (Gods or other incorporeal presences, alternate worlds, etc.), the nature of the self and one’s relationship to others. More all-encompassing than a paradigm.