A Model of Perception

A Model of PerceptionThoughts updated to conform with Infinite Intelligence by Meher Baba Chris Ott © 2010 A Model of Perception Introduction The image on the right is of a movie projectionist in his booth. Baba uses seeing analogies such as a movie projector, eyeglasses, a mirror, and so forth in Infinite Intelligence to explain Godʼs production of the imagination (Universe) and experience of the imagination. Here I want to talk about the projector, lens, light analogies I conceived in 2004 and see if I can improve on them from what Iʼve learned since then in Infinite Intelligence. On the right is one of the charts I did in 2004 to illustrate the concept laid out in my book The Evolution of Perception, which attempted to deal with various philosophical issues in a way that seemed to me to be consistent with Meher Babaʼs God Speaks. What the book and its charts (done later) lay out is probably the first emanationist concept that incorporates natural laws, psychology, and many other contemporary discoveries in language, identity, cognition, and so forth. So itʼs of contemporary interest. See Appendix “A” at the end of this document for the 2004 charts and some made later. They can also be downloaded online at the website shown below, along with The Evolution of Perception and my second book Essentials of a Spiritual Metaphysics that clarifies Evolution and ties it to Babaʼs teaching. http://www.meherbabadnyana.net/article_percpt.html#03 2 of 33 A Model of Perception The four main symbols Before talking about revisions to my original model, I want to first go over some of the main metaphors that are used in all of these figures. Here are the main ones. In brief they are: 1. The eye representing God. 2. The projector representing God as the projector of his infinite latent imagination. 3. Light representing Godʼs seeing his imagination. 4. The lens representing the sanskara. Weʼll go over each of these in turn and explain in more detail and precision what they do and donʼt symbolize. Weʼll also discuss the characteristics of the actual things chosen as symbols and why those characteristics lend themselves so well to this metaphysical subject of experience. 3 of 33 However. sound from vibration. Thus jivatma means embodied soul. It sees. because he does not have a form through which to take experience of it. Seeing is closely related to consciousness. When God identifies with a form within the imagination to take experience of his impressions. Robots and mechanical sensors are designed to appear to see. and so forth. This is covered in detail on page 19 below under the subheading Three States of God. Only living things see. Thus Ishwar does not take experience of the world he produces by way of his own conceptions. because you have to be conscious to actually see. Ishwar projects (produces) the Universe (imagination) but does not identify with any form in it. the eye image in our case doesnʼt simply represent the faculty of sight. Without a body the world cannot be experienced. It doesnʼt matter what you take experience of or with what part of yourself you take that experience with. your tongue. What is meant to be expressed with the eye is the faculty of taking experience of something. Ishwar corresponds closely with the usual Western conception of God producing and upholding the world.A Model of Perception The eye analogy The eye is a great metaphor for what it does. he is called the jivatma. Or you can even do this just with your mind when you experience your thoughts and emotions. but they merely respond dumbly to physical stimulation. In Infinite Intelligence Baba refers to the jivatma 1 It is the body that gives form to the world it experiences. identifying himself as a single form within it. Baba explains that there is a state of God called Ishwar. You can do this with your nose. that He sees the world he is projecting. The actual taking experience of something (being conscious of it) is what we mean to convey using the image of the eye. your fingers.1 It is only when God is identifying with His projected imagination. It is unique to the living. For instance the brain produces color from radiation. In Sanskrit jiv means body and atma means soul. Ishwar is the formless Creator. 4 of 33 . e. when experiencing himself as a plant or an animal or a man. But it is also okay to think of the small eyes as atmas. is Ishwar. so long as it is understood that there is no true division. light. therefore.A Model of Perception state of Godʼs thinking simply as the jiv (body). This is important to know because in some charts of mine where there was a big eye on the left projecting its own light. i. This includes both Ishwar and jivs.e. Thus God. For God could never be in the imagination that he projects. The apparent division is produced by Maya which expresses itself in the charts as the sanskaras (lenses). Thus really only the left big eye represents formless soul. When Ishwar takes himself to be one of the jivs within its imagination in order to experience its imagination. All souls remain in the Oversoul (Paramatma). is called jiv (body).” While this is true. and through them. i. experiences the world more and more as their forms evolve through the stages of evolution. In short the big eye represents God as he is.e. but the correct label would have been jivs. The small eyes represent jiv. which is the most inclusive concept of God. represented by the various symbols such as eyes. Thus the big eye on the left of the diagrams represents God in his Ishwar state. a medium for experiencing his imagination (the world). who over and over comes to experience himself as jivs. 5 of 33 . The eye on the left. All the seemingly extended parts. as a jiv. but it is more accurate to call the small eyes jivs (bodies). everywhere. lenses. he effectively is the body for that time. i. limited and finite. I originally labeled this eye “God.” The smaller eyes supervening in the imagination of Ishwar to the right I never did label. as Ishwar who produces or projects the imagination is one state of God. All separations represented by the spreading of the chart from left to right – not unlike an unfolding accordion – occur in the imagination of God. Of course Heʼs really all the while God. It should be very clear that nothing in any of the charts is meant to depict anything other than God (seeing). it is jiv. for really there is only one real Soul. For when God takes himself to be a body. At one time I had considered labeling the small eyes atmas (souls). it would have been more precise to use the word “Ishwar. and the small eyes coming out of him represent Godʼs experience of himself in the imagination as a body. and so forth are merely the spreading out for conceptual reasons the single omnipresent God. It radiates as white light in all directions within the projector housing unless a lens is attached to the front of the projector which directs and focuses the light. For it will help in understanding the analogies. Light that emits from this bulb has no color or shape to it. Inside a projector housing is a projector bulb. The light that emits from the bulb is pure white light radiation. 6 of 33 .A Model of Perception The projector analogy Next is the old-fashioned film projector. When the light passes through the lens and film strip it becomes limited which causes it to form a picture. the type they used in Babaʼs day. but contains all latently. Baba uses this image to symbolize more than one effect he explains in Infinite Intelligence. White light radiation contains all the colors latently. Iʼll go over all of them here. know a little about actual projectors. But before going into these. It has no limitations and thus forms no picture. But before these are split apart by a filter or prism. The lens forces it to focus into one direction (rather than be dispersed) and the film strip gives it color. the light has no color. There are many unique and fortunate characteristics about old filmstrip movie projectors that come together to form an excellent metaphor for mysticism. The result is a picture. Plato imagines a group of slaves who have lived chained in a cave all of their lives. i. that color what we see) to the frames of a filmstrip passing one by one through a projector that partially block the light of the projector bulb. and thereby produce an image. The image you see is made up of the absence of what you donʼt of the totality of all latent possibilities in the white light. facing a blank wall. What hits the screen is the portion allowed through by the celluloid strip.A Model of Perception The way the movie on the screen gets its color is that the celluloid pigment on the film restrains portions of the spectrum of light in various places. For what you see on the screen in a cinema is actually the result of what you are not seeing. What you see moving on the screen is actually a colored shadow produced by the fact that some of the color spectrums latent in the pure white imageless light coming from the projector bulb are held back from hitting the screen by the color on the film.e. And of course these film frames are what produce the images for us on the screen by coloring the light. The slaves watch shadows projected on the wall by 7 of 33 . For he often calls the illusion (the Universe) Godʼs shadow. as well as his frequent use of the word “shadow” when speaking of the Universe. Thus what you are actually seeing is a colorful shadow. Anyone who is familiar with Platoʼs Analogy of the Cave will recognize that the filmstrip analogy Baba uses in Infinite Intelligence is nearly the same. Just as sunglasses hold back some spectrums of light but not all to get to your eyes. So light is passing through a strip of film before it is caste upon the screen of the movie theater. but an illusion made of an absence (as with all shadows). In Infinite Intelligence Baba compares sanskaras (impressions left on our mind by the past. What produces the images is not a substance. This helps to see the depth of Babaʼs analogy. Thus what you see on the movie screen in a cinema are literally the “colored shadows” of the dye on the film. Thus sanskaras block us from seeing the white light as it is unbroken up. Not only is a movie an illusion. For part of what Baba is saying is contained in this fact of forming shadows by withholding of the whole. Understanding this is helpful for understanding Babaʼs analogy. This is the same with any ordinary shadow incidentally. not something real being added to it. what is held back from the totality of light coming from the bulb. but is formed out of what is not getting past an obstruction. and begin to ascribe reality to these shadows. They do not become Self-realized. as he can perceive the true form of reality rather than the mere shadows seen by the prisoners. So this repeats an ancient Platonic idea. the bandaa ((bound)) slave state begins. 2 Ralph Waldo Emerson was very keen on the idea that Plato had made trips to India where he learned many of his ideas. According to Plato. We are all watching the cinema of our impressions (sanskaras) play out on the screen of our own mind. when sanskaras appear or the realizing of the universe appears. He thus cries and laughs at the scenes in the film as if they were his life. and forgetting that it is he himself that is doing the cranking. i. The viewer in the cinema is the same one who is causing the movie to play.2 Men who are bound (by their desires) take the shadows of their sanskaras and forming an illusory image on the screen (which is actually their own light or seeing projected through the filmstrip in the projector) to be real and so do not take experience of themselves. (Infinite Intelligence) But Baba improves upon Platoʼs analogy in Infinite Intelligence. Incidentally Plato himself had been made a slave for a period of time and nearly died. projecting his own light through his own sanskaras (film strip) for himself onto a screen. When the falseness in the thinking appears. the shadows are as close as the prisoners get to seeing reality. Each individual is his own projectionist turning the crank on his own 1920s film projector. For he has forgotten himself and come to take himself to be a character in his own movie. An admirer of his luckily bought his freedom. Baba says that each individual plays the roll both of director and audience. He then explains how the philosopher is like a prisoner who is freed from the cave and comes to understand that the shadows on the wall are not constitutive of reality at all. God-realized.e. Using the analogy of a cinema the people in the cinema represent the slaves.e.A Model of Perception things passing in front of a fire behind them. i. 8 of 33 . next the lens that focuses the light (Godʼs concentration on his search).A Model of Perception Above is a 19th century hand crank projector. followed by its passing through the film strip. signifying the sanskaras. 9 of 33 . The film is shadow. Notice the lamp house on the left. like halos. 4 The light does not represent Godʼs imagination.4 This may seem a bit strange or counterintuitive. It is central to mysticism and religion through the ages. For the mystic. Today many religions use light and darkness to represent good and evil. for light seems more like something that is seen than the seeing itself. such forms of hidden occult light are not the sense in which the symbol is used in the highest forms of mysticism. it is clear how this simplification for purposes of communication to most people occurs. But the mystical interpretation of light and darkness has always been as knowledge and ignorance. darkness represents ignorance which he attempts to overcome in himself. Here light stands for seeing itself. the focus is put on controlling the bad actions that ignorance causes. for imagination is darkness. Thus it is an obvious leap to a mystical symbol of knowledge. while darkness represents its opposite of seeing falsely (Maya).3 In the most general terms light represents seeing truly (enlightenment or illumination). In ancient times both solar deities and the sun itself were very often worshipped. For religious people who are not so far along. It represents the seeing of it or conceiving of it. nor are such finer “kinds” of light what we mean in the charts here. the light of seeing.A Model of Perception The light analogy Light is an ever-present spiritual symbol that seems to always convey something religious or heartfelt to people. 10 of 33 . It is a good metaphor for it is in the bright light that things are made most clear. yet its symbolism has many interpretations. But for the sake of forming an image to represent to us 3 Since ignorance produces evil actions. Although there are forms of light other than physical light that we are told people on the higher planes perceive with their subtle senses. A Model of Perception the feeling of Godʼs that his imagination projects out. Were we to combine these two metaphors of eye opening and lenses being added to the eye it would not make sense. 6 However. to rely entirely on it as the sole metaphor would be too limiting to convey much about that seeing. The accumulation of impressions. which Baba does at length in God Speaks. This merely means that God is conceiving of what he sees as being apart from himself. At best the eye analogy can be extended to include the analogy of its stages of gradual opening upon waking to mean taking more and more experience of the world by way of evolution. The eye fully closed represents God unconscious. However. And each stage of its opening represents a stage of evolution where there is more consciousness. And the seven phases of the eye opening applies to the experience of the jiv. In truth it is the accumulation of the sanskaras (symbolized by the pieces of glass in the charts) that causes this awakening process of consciousness that God experiences and which Baba symbolizes with the eye opening. What can be done through expensive animation at another time may be able to resolve these issues in a wonderful way by covering each at a time. But when discussing its dynamic processes of seeing through and in terms of its stored past impressions.5 In God Speaks Baba uses the analogy of an eye opening in seven incremental stages to symbolize the evolution of consciousness. We might thus think we should add this eye opening to these charts. that is open but seeing falsely. They are two ways of saying the same thing. the other the rise of phenomenal experience) and to merge them in one image would be redundant and confusing. represented by the fully open eye. 11 of 33 . Thus it should really be the small eyes in the chart (on the right) that should be gradually opening if any. and its causing for itself the appearance of projection into space and time. Finally the human form is reached where there is full consciousness. While the light symbolizes the same thing as the eye (i. because it represents the conscious. emphasizing different aspects of the process (one emphasizing consciousness. if the reader likes they may imagine the simultaneous opening of the eye as the process goes on up to human and full consciousness. which in turn gives to the soul these stages of increased consciousness expressed with the opening eye. causes the build up of experience that creates the consciousness for the eye. the notion of light passing through pieces of glass. producing. something must stand in as a metaphor for this. which would correspond to the seven stages of the opening eye in Part 8 of God Speaks. out there. This is because the same process is being expressed in a different way. symbolized by the addition of pieces of glass being added in front of the eye. Here the emphasis is upon explaining the rise of world experience. The light rays donʼt stand for the imagination actually projecting away from God. or being delimited by obstacles such as film to form shadows.6 5 The light rays represent Godʼs seeing of his imagination when God is projecting it. is matchless. or being reflected in a mirror. symbolically extending from and away from Him. But note that this ought not be imagined to apply to the big eye on the Left. which would make no sense since God is omnipresent and eternal. but not aware aspect of God. seeing). in these charts we begin and end with the eye open.e. The effect that a lens has. A compound lens is many lenses that are used in succession. Many interesting effects can be achieved. We need to be aware of this for it allows for two kinds of metaphor. It affects the light that passes through it. the exact same effect by the lens (color or shape) occurs when you look through it. A lens is not a mere piece of glass. In a compound lens the affect of many layers is more that the sum of its parts. The eye itself is such a lens for light. This is projected light or outward moving light. But lenses for cameras and projectors use several in compound lenses. it applies to the light that is projected through the lens onto a screen. works in both of two ways. things will appear to be caste with that color. 12 of 33 .A Model of Perception The lens analogy The final symbol is the lens. Second. On the left is a cut-away of a camera lens showing the many different lenses that make up the compound lens. If the lens is ground. Just know itʼs the same basic concept being used in two directions. Glasses you wear use only one ground piece of glass. In that case the light is coming toward the viewer and is affected by the lens prior to being received by the eye. then it will affect the shape and size of objects. the glasses metaphor and the projectors metaphor. For instance if the lens is tinted a particular color and you look through it. First. either on the color or shape. A Model of Perception Light is passing through a strip of film before it is caste upon the screen of the movie theater. The result is a picture. Baba likens this film strip to impressions left on our mind by the past that color what we see. What you are actually seeing is a colorful shadow. They are what produce the images for us on the screen by coloring the light. 13 of 33 . What you see moving on the screen is actually a colored shadow produced by the fact that some of the white imageless light coming from the projector bulb is held back from hitting the screen by the color on the film. He was mere Intelligence that was not being used and did not even know of its own existence. he took up no space. But it too was latent and unused. As said. no form. So. See and Smell Comes About Godʼs Omnipresence and Omniscience Everything that can be conceived is conceived by God. i. He was asleep. there was nothing for God to see. there being no thoughts to form a mind. taking the experience of it. God had nothing. before the beginning of things. In the beginning God conceived nothing. And God had not yet conceived it. So how could he be any of them? Not only did God have no color or form. Not even a dream. not conceiving. sleeping infinity. God had no mind.e. no color. if he should ever imagine anything. for imagination is necessary for conceiving thoughts. For thoughts too must be conceived. This Intelligence also had the capacity for imagination. i. And God had the capacity for taking awareness of his imagination. But it too was latent and unused. Before God woke or began to conceive. for a mind is a body of thoughts. And God had not conceived any. And God had no mind.A Model of Perception How The World We Experience. But now we want to go further and build a picture to express what happened next. For space can be conceived. seeing it. for imagination is necessary for conceiving thoughts. this Intelligence also had the capacity for imagination. But of course prior to God conceiving anything. latent.e. and God had no thoughts. Touch. and since all that can be conceived is conceived by God. God had no body. 14 of 33 . He was merely Infinite Intelligence. there were no such qualities as these prior to his conceiving them. For all these can be conceived. dormant. That is much how Godʼs original condition is described in God Speaks and Infinite Intelligence. Thus it did not apply to him. urge to know. 15 of 33 . itself being so tranquil (not thinking).7 And so Godʼs first action (which was his desiring to know who he was) left an impression. What God conceived when he felt his own first urge did impress him. i. And the impression that it left was the lens of distinction. representing the Intelligence that God is. Oneʼs actions which one experiences always cause an impression. a mere idea. for there was nothing to see but itself. This question or urge to know. which. Thus this eye was not even aware of itself. and thus are entirely unimpressed. and saw nothing. It just had the urge to know. The first urge impressed God because he did not know that this idea was a bogus illusion.A Model of Perception First Urge We begin with the image of an eye. was the first action by God. But. It was mere sight with nothing to see but itself. Perfect Masters experience the illusion without gathering any impressions because they know it is an illusion. It did not know what it was seeking. For in the very act of asking or wanting to know what he was.e. God had conceived of a separation between himself and what he 7 In truth an action must impress someone (cause a psychic reaction) in order to leave an impression. not knowing it. But the intelligence did not know even this much yet. though entirely capable of conceiving (thinking) or recognizing (seeing) anything. God peering into God. which was the feeling of separation or distinction. originally conceived nothing. Next the tranquility of this intelligence stirred with a question. so in hindsight we say it was himself that God wanted to know. There was nothing but himself to know. It causes no fear or desire in them. It was the first event in the intelligence that was God. it did not take note even of that. which was just a whim by God and had no prior cause. And it did cause a desire to see its possibilities multiply. For distinction is presupposed in the very asking of the question what or who. there was no out of God in which to look. which was omnipresent.A Model of Perception sought. the first impression. 16 of 33 . Thus God begins to look out (into void where he imagines he might be which is where he is not) through the schema of distinction. Thus this was the first action. And this created the impression in God of distinction or separation. This act produced the imagined impression that there was. For this act pulled his consciousness away from himself in search of what he might be. This forged in God the first lens and causes all subsequent lenses (which are all forms of distinction) to be made possible. and the first projection. though not consciously. But since there was nothing but this intelligence. 8 So when God had the Urge to know Self. which causes a desire. which compels another action. As each impression (lens) is added to the eye. which causes another impression and so forth. it formed in him the impression of distinction. This is the evolving percept. All subsequent attributes which evolve after distinction are forms of distinction. This is the domino that set off the dominoes that created the Universe. For there is one more aspect to make sense of it that is difficult to add to the charts and it remain clear what it means. Thus from the first action of God (his initial original whimsical urge to know Self) there was an endless sequence of cause and effect reactions. But this action – impression – desire – action motif is not enough to entirely describe how this process of Godʼs thinking works to produce the Universe. which is nothing but the evolving ideas of God projected into imagined space.A Model of Perception The mechanics Every action leaves an impression (sanskara). From a psychogenic point of view the world is made out of distinctions. there is something that God experiences following that lens. He then does not see the lens itself but sees what is produced through and as a result of this lens. But through the impression of distinction (through that lens) God saw endless possibilities for distinctions. There is some degree of image produced. My charts are an imperfect attempt to line up those dominoes correctly.9 8 9 I think it would be possible for this to be expressed with computer animation. 17 of 33 . And this urgency is pran (primal energy). "I command light to shine!" And light started shining. and this produces the experience of a spaceless space for God in which to search for himself. and it is with these conceptions that God plays in his sleep without seeing the Universe. while not experiencing the Universe as form. and how I believe they relate to the charts. But the very act of looking produces in its enactment the sense of space. begins to look into the spaceless vacuum or void (of itself) for what it might be. This is part of the lela of God. And primal energy still pervades the Universe and is the energy behind all subtle and gross energy. And this spaceless space that is projected from God is the akash. which was originally merely latent in God. So the initial urge projected for God his latent sense of urgency.A Model of Perception These potentialities for distinctions conceived by God (who conceives freely as he is independent) caused in God desire and delight. i. Simultaneously. God looked at the light and saw that it was good.e. what they are. for God is omnipresent and so nothing is outside of God. it produces the sense for God of an outerness. a potential urgency that was not enacted. In fact there is no such thing as outerness. the schema of space. Here I wish to explain how I believe pran and akash come about. Only the jiv takes experience of form in the universe through the media of a form. Godʼs looking for himself in the akash is felt with some urgency. This is what Baba means in Infinite Intelligence when he says that God thinks the Universe but does not see it. primal energy and spaceless space. God said. it produces akash. Staring in search of itself (or concentrating for something to see) produces for God the feeling of space.e. Only as jiv does God experience the world he is all the while creating as Ishwar. The whim enacted or released this urgency. Pran and Akash In Infinite Intelligence Baba talks about pran and akash. (Genesis 1) Ishwar. When the eye first looks for itself. 18 of 33 . i. does continually experience these primal conceptions upon which the phenomenal Universe supervenes. and Sadguru State (or Nirvakalpa State). It is an earlier event that makes the out-folding of the lenses and resultant experiences possible. Bliss). working upon each other to find Godʼs identity. They are not sanskaras caused by experience. Three states of God In metaphysics. One such subdivision of God that Baba emphasizes in Infinite Intelligence is of Parameshwar. Ishwar. But pran and akash do not fit into the chart of how the impressions cause the Universe. preserver. They are not part of the dominoes. Rather they are actual aspects of God that are projected out of him with the original whim. They are another aspect of the story. In a complicated animation. Vishnu. So it should be understood that the phenomenal type of space and energy (e. and Shiva (or Mahesh). Hinduism has Brahma. Godʼs attributes are also three in Hinduism and together are known as sat-chit-anand (Power. which then.e. the pran and akash could be explained with voice over and images. and destroyer.A Model of Perception Now Godʼs sense of urgency (pran) is applied to the spaceless space (the void into which he attempts to find himself) and this coming together of pran and akash begins to vibrate with possibility that explodes as Godʼs imagination. and Holy Spirit. which is incommensurable with this analogy of lenses and light passing through it. creator. Knowledge.10 10 Baba emphasizes this tripartite subdivision in Infinite Intelligence because it best helps accentuate the roll of sanskaras and their effect. 19 of 33 . Son. and why this is is necessary and how to eradicate them. The main thrust of Infinite Intelligence is directed at explaining the sanskaras and their eradication. but should not be demonstrated as concurrent or continuous with the model of the lenses. left the first sanskara.g. Father. i. They are Godʼs own aspects that he uses to form his imagination. discussion of God often includes subdivisions when speaking of God in terms of his different functions and manifestations. motion. For instance Catholicism divides God into three “people” to express three conditions of his being. Yet these reflect in some manner pran and akash. For pran and akash are not impressions. gravity) that we experience and that is described in Evolution of Perception is not the pran and akash. So the result of Godʼs initial act of looking projected pran and akash. Thus pran and akash should not be included as lenses or pieces of glass in the charts. So for instance. (does not produce or see the world)11 2. He is the furthest back projector. When we are awake going about our day all of us are Ishwar in one sense.14 This is to improve ease of reading. Ishwar. i. the realizer in all realizers. everything. and I may not be perfectly consistent.12 3. Absolutely everything is Paramatma playing a role as that – from a speck of dust to Ishwara to a sadguru. if I mean sadguru state (Real State) Iʼll say that. God as he is usually conceived of in the West. not taking himself to be his imagination. God in His Beyond State. Parameshwar. Paramatma means the one supreme soul. conscious God (produces but does not see the world).e. and so forth. produces the Universe. I think. This means unconscious God in his original deep sleep state. In the charts this is the big eye on the left. also to improve the flow of the writing style. the self in every self. 14 Note: In God Speaks Baba refers to God in His Beyond Beyond State. unconscious God in his original state. not identifying with any forms in it) does not 11 12 13 Parameshwar is God without attributes Ishwar is God with attributes. Paramatma (the all-inclusive sense). Ishwar = Conscious Paramatma who is Creating the imagination (Universe). Ishwar in his grand formless sense is conscious. The closeness of the Sanskrit words Parameshwar and Paramatma impedes reading. Thus Iʼm choosing those terms that seem to best aid ease of readership. Luckily Baba uses many synonyms from which to choose for nearly any major concept. yet having no body (i. Parameshwar. Here I use the word “God” when I mean to convey the most supreme sense of God. Sometimes I use the word God without concern for which sense I mean. which are more than are listed here. If I mean Godʼs original unattributed state Iʼll say Parameshwar. Nirvakalpa state. the thinker in all thinkers. I am trying to make the reading flow easier. i. the dreamer in all dreamers. Thus using the word God to mean Paramatma (the all inclusive sense) is not inconsistent with God Speaks either. but not realizing it. are all forms of the most inclusive sense of God called Paramatma. Iʼll say that. superconscious God (neither produces nor sees the world but sees Self) In God Speaks Baba explains that all the many states of God. 2. when used often.13 When I speak of one of His subdivisions Iʼll speak of it by its name to avoid confusion with another subdivision.A Model of Perception 1.e. If I mean Ishwar. along with their subdivisions. When you go to bed you are also in Parameshwar state.e. Going over this division again: 1. He is projecting the universe but does not see it. 20 of 33 . Seeing through its stored impressions (sanskaras) God takes himself as a jiv in the imagination and thus sees. i. or as sadguru takes turns experiencing each until he drops his body. And what makes the soul take itself to be the jiv in the imagination is the sanskaras gathered by the mind of that jiv. and thus not only experiencing it but experiencing it as real and all around him and himself as part of it.A Model of Perception experience the Universe he is producing. And the sadguru is one who has stopped all this but remains conscious and thus is conscious of Self. Ishwara in his enformed state can take experience of the world through his gross or subtle senses. Through the subtle senses experience is taken of subtle objects. And the small eyes depicted are the jivs. taking Himself to be within the movie he alone is projecting.e. and takes himself (that is formless and colorless and invisible) to be nothing. as a jiv (body) in the imagination. except for experience of Self. For to experience the gross world requires a gross body. The Jivatma then takes the Universe (that he sees all around him including his own body) to be everything. It is only when Ishwar takes himself to be the imagination. 21 of 33 . He takes himself to be a jiv (body) within it and experiences it through that body. Experience of the subtle world is taken through the subtle body through the subtle senses. through the media of the body formed by those impressions. but Ishwar thinking falsely. no experience is possible. Each individual Jivatma is Ishwar.15 3. 15 Experience of the gross world is taken through the gross body through the gross senses. With no body. that he takes experience of the world through that media. thinking it. Jiv is Ishwar (and thus also Paramatma) taking himself to be his imagination and in it. which is God Creating but not seeing what he is creating. Through the gross senses experience is taken of gross objects. Here God experiences Self but does not experience the Universe. the big eye on the left of the charts stands for Ishwar. Ishwar is Paramatma creating the Universe by conceiving it. Sadguru state or Nirvakalpa state = God in his Superconscious state. Then experiences only Self. the world as if all around him. Therefore. Each impression produced by Ishwar when he is thinking is experienced as a new idea filled with unexplored potentiality for its application toward further ideas. i. This is the lela of God that he does without knowing what he is producing. Upon asking the question and looking within himself for the answer he is Ishwar (Creating God). He merely is thinking independently. take himself to be his imagination.A Model of Perception A new version of the model of perception God before he asked the original question was Parameshwar (Supreme God). When God as Ishwar begins to think. As forms begin to supervene upon Ishwarʼs thinking Ishwar identifies with a form. Distinction was the first impression. which so impresses God that it leaves a new impression (sanskara) and so forth. But these sanskaras need not be resolved (worked out) by God for in this state God does not think falsely. For in this state God does not identify with any form within his conception. he is creating a universe that he does not realize he is creating. Once this happens God is jiv. 22 of 33 .e. In this first chart there is only Ishwar. Jiv has not yet appeared. producing thoughts and enjoying playing with them. and pure relations of mathematics build up. From this point forward the Universe with its stars. God experiences these relations he is producing and loves them but does not see the Universe they are simultaneously producing. In this Ishwar state God does not take himself to be the Universe (does not identify with it) thus is not bound by the impressions. So in the series of evolution. harmonics. the stone (i. nebula and so forth all evolve into their present being. For only through the media of jiv are these qualities imbued into the relations. ratios. 9 of original handwritten manuscript (changed in published version). colorless) state. moons. producing the Universe in its primary (formless.A Model of Perception In other words. atom. hydrogen. but for clearer explanation we will speak of the atom as stone which is the corresponding form of the atom) form is the lowest form (most imperfect form)16 With the maturation of the atom. With this form the jiv becomes a reality as Ishwar takes experience through atom (stone). but in their primary quality state of pure relations. that each stage in the evolution of perception is nothing more than the sum of the 16 Infinite Intelligence Notebooks p. which must be done by the evolving jiv. this marks the start of inorganic evolution (described in Evolution of Perception).e. the result of each conceptual experiment that God tries (to find out who he is) as Ishwar (formless Creator) winds up only granting him new possibilities for how to conceive. geometries. continuing to not be imbued yet with color or perceived form. for this is the underlying logic of my whole book Evolution of Perception. During this period the atom begins to evolve through its seven subtle forms and eventually reaching its first fully gross form. He does not think falsely. Natural laws. The impression caused by each action fills God with wonder at what is thus possible from that. 23 of 33 . Note carefully. solids into into planets. This final stage coincides with the process of reincarnation. galaxies. What follows after this is the organic evolution of the forms of the jiv. i. rich and poor. and seen differently through that development. atoms into elements. but still in a primary unseen state.A Model of Perception schemata that have come before. and this gradual process forms the Universe we observe. 24 of 33 . the sense of separate identity does not occur in this earliest form. However. The beginning of the stage of Inorganic evolution marks a juncture in the evolution of perception. elements into gases. which is the beginning of organic evolution. are imbued into the image. Suns. Only one schema at a time is added. separation and true individuality begins to occur very slightly and this increases in increments up to man where it is complete. For it is the point that Ishwar begins to identify with the imagination as jiv in the stone form. Upon these conceptions supervened the natural laws which are also schemata of seeing. I use my original diagram of it from 2004. for it still holds good. applied to some new development in seeing. that made the natural laws possible. Experience increases with each stage of development of the form that the jiv experiences through. And upon these supervened the first atom. For this is the moment when Ishwar identifies with the imagination as jiv and is the start of the evolution of consciousness for the jiv. In the plant form. and so forth. The rise of the first atom marks the start of inorganic evolution. as do impressions and consciousness. Organic evolution marks the start of life and separate identity. which in turn is followed by the cultural evolution that occurs in the human beings. experiencing as a separated individual within a population. in which distinctions such as good and bad. Summarizing Thus first came the evolution of the perceptual schemata like time and space.e. gases into solids. The arising of the first atom is important. all evolved in this period. nebula. without any name labeling at all. refer to God Speaks by Meher Baba. i. which is limited to the evolution of perceived phenomena on the gross level with which we are confronted. and takes experience of it as jiv. Christ or Buddha consciousness. For a description of involution. 25 of 33 . Ishwar creates the Universe without seeing it. Involution is not touched upon in The Evolution of Perception. My own emphasis has been on discouraging materialism. to accentuate intuition over discursiveness.A Model of Perception If we could summarize this whole evolution in one image. the reverse process back toward enlightenment. The lenses before the eyes of the thee jivs on the right are the cultural lenses (or human sanskaras) that form the cultural world. The lenses before Ishwar (top left) are the primary lenses forming the objective world. nor described in the charts. and my writing has mostly been limited to that.e. we would see God and the impressions. If we could turn around and see what has created us. ourselves in our original state. which is unconditioned by any schemata at all while remaining conscious. because it is outside the scope of the book. what would we see? We would see something like this. He himself is a dreaming a dream within Ishwarʼs greater dream. The screen image that appears in this image simply represents the image world that is seen by the jiv (the individualʼs percept). It does not represent a screen the light of God hits. 26 of 33 . Itʼs not perfect But it still conveys the general notion. partially molded by his own impressions and partially by those of Ishwar (projecting from behind him and through him). Each jiv has his piece of the whole image. It is just the image enjoyed by jiv. as Baba explains.A Model of Perception Appendix “A” 2004 Evolution of Perception charts figure # 1 This was the first chart I did in 2004 to illustrate The Evolution of Perception. A Model of Perception This was the last chart from 2004 in which I tried to combine all of the ideas as they were developing in my mind into one chart. figure # 2 27 of 33 . A Model of Perception These two charts form one long chain that I could not fit on one piece of paper. That middle image that connects them follows on the next page. And the second depicts cultural. as described in Evolution of Perception. figures # 3 and # 4 28 of 33 . There is one that fits in between. The first depicts inorganic evolution. at the point where the individual splits off its identity from the whole. And the experience is as of the species of stone. So seventh plane mirrors stone form. Thus it was experience. or a conception of in and out. and not as a particular stone in a field of stones as we think of stone. One might assume that this takes place when Ishwar identifies himself with the atom form and thus first becomes jiv. 29 of 33 . While Baba says consciousness begins with the atom form. does not. Baba says the sadguru is like a stone in that he is entirely unaffected by what happens to him. all the while keeping the full consciousness that was created as a result of the evolution. In stone jiv state it seems there is merely a nearly nil sense of being. I believe the sense of being a separate one of something among somethings. saying it is the same state but had full consciously.A Model of Perception This image is meant to describe the first appearance of a sense of separate identity at the juncture between the inorganic and the organic evolution. but not differentiated experience from the whole. This would coincide with Ishwar taking himself as the plant form. and nothing more. It was still fused as one.17 figure # 5 17 This is because the seven stages of evolution (formed out of the evolving schemata) are retraced backward in the seven planes of involution. This is very likely because in Infinite Intelligence Baba repeatedly compares the sadguru state to the stone state. In involution (the spiritual path) the schemata gathered in evolution are discarded in reverse order until the original state of unity is regained. stone (atom). not unlike a sanskara.A Model of Perception figure # 6 In this chart I tried to delineate the distinction between where the objective and subjective worlds arise in the sequence of Godʼs creativity. figure # 7 In this image I am showing how the body supervenes upon the natural laws that form in the mind of God prior to his identifying with the first form.e. i. Note that the eye is overlapped with a lens. 30 of 33 . This is to show that the body through which you see forms a sort of lens in itself. the phenomenal world of observation. 31 of 33 . i. It is because they cannot be discovered in the percept of oneʼs experience. It was intended to show the reader why the source of ourselves is so hard to discover.A Model of Perception figure # 8 I made this chart specifically for Essentials of a Spiritual Metaphysics. One cannot even find the source in oneʼs thoughts.e. for oneʼs thoughts are also observed and are in a sense phenomenal (before your mindʼs eye). Thus only the enlightened one like Baba that has stepped back from the cave and returned to help the slaves can explain it. figures # 9 and figure # 10 32 of 33 . made me think this is not quite right. It represents clear light becoming the phenomenal world we see. I meant to emphasize one witness. which had not been published yet. It meant to communicate that it was all the same light passing through each. Ishwar on the left does not take of experience of what he produces. I felt this failed to some extent because it appeared to show three lights from the start.A Model of Perception This image above shows light being projected through many eyes. to form the world in front of them. It is only the jivs (small eyes) that do. The idea of this chart seems self-explanatory. This is just due to the limits of my tools and graphic ability. Infinite Intelligence. The idea is that one white light breaks up into many colors as through a prism when it passes through the various individual jivs. which I read later. 33 of 33 .A Model of Perception The main thing that this image was meant to convey was that it was the exact same light (Intelligence) passing through all jivs. This is emphasized in the beginning of Infinite Intelligence. figure # 11 figure # 12 And this one I did upon the spur of the moment.