I live the life I love and I love the life I live.
—WILLIE DIXON
The previous chapter was about considering whether Consciousness Creates Reality is a law of the universe, or a fantasy, whether there was any supporting evidence that it is in fact true, and how that evidence may appear in our lives.
So by now you’ve somewhat made up your mind about where you stand with the idea that you “create your reality.” Everyone admits that it’s true to some degree. The question is, how far do you take it? As far as whether or not to go to the ice-cream store, or as far as believing that the leaf that falls on your head was a creation of yours?
The implications of this principle are huge. Not just to us and the life we live, but also to bigger lives: cities, states, countries and the planet. But first—what about you?
What’s for Breakfast, What’s for Life?
You’d probably agree that in countless small ways, you create your life every day. You decide whether or not you’re going to get up when the alarm clock goes off. You decide what to wear, what to eat for breakfast, or maybe to skip breakfast. And as you run into people throughout the day, at home, work or the freeway, you decide how to treat each one. Your intentions for the day—or your default decision not to set any intentions but just to float on through—affect what you do and what you’ll experience.
In the bigger picture, the whole trajectory of your life is generated by your choices. Do you want to get married? Have children? Go to college? What to study? What career? What job offer to accept? Your life doesn’t just “happen”; it’s based on the choices you make—or don’t make—every day.
But the question remains, How far does that life-making extend? As far as that chance meeting with the girl of your dreams? As far as the tyrannical boss? Winning the lottery?1 And who’s life are YOU making anyway? Seems like a dumb question, but the “I” in “I create my reality” is a big question mark. And answering it gives some clarity to this whole creation stew.
__________________
1 Actually, everyone takes credit for that one. “After what I’ve been through, I had it coming.”
We’re reality-producing machines. We create the effects of reality all the time. If we take information from a small knowledge base, we have a small reality. If we have a large knowledge base, we have a large reality.
—Joe Dispenza
Who Am I?
Back to great questions. The Indian sage Ramana Maharshi built his teachings around this very question. According to him, the inquiry into this question leads directly to enlightenment. But let’s postpone enlightenment for now and limit the question to the act of creating . . .
We are running the holodeck. It has such flexibility that anything you can imagine, it will create for you. And you learn. Your intention causes this thing to materialize once you’re conscious enough, and you learn how to use your intentionality.
—William Tiller, Ph.D.
According to Fred Alan Wolf: “The first thing to realize is that the idea that you create your own reality, if by you you mean that egotistic person that you think is running your show creates your reality, it’s probably wrong. It’s probably not that you that’s creating the reality at all.” But this begs the question: “So who is?” Certainly when you order that first cup of coffee in the morning, it’s pretty clear that the “egotistic person,” or the personality decided upon the double cappuccino, and not the transcendental, immortal self. And that when the tree lands on your shiny new car, the personality had nothing whatsoever to do with that.
Most often people reject the “I Create Reality” idea when something occurs in their life that they absolutely, positively would never, ever create. “I would never create this!” That’s true; they—the personality—never would. But as all spiritual traditions maintain, there’s more than one “you.”
This divine schizophrenia goes by many labels: ego/true self, personality/divinity, son of man/son of god, mortal body/immortal soul, but in essence it says there are different levels from which you are creating. And the goal of enlightenment is to erase this fragmentation of self and create from one source. (Which I guess is why “Who Am I?” works.) It’s to expand our consciousness until we are conscious of all our creations.
And accepting that “I create . . .” is an amazing tool for that expansion. For if it’s true, then every time you reject your part in creating reality, you are rejecting or denying a part of yourself. Thus the fragmentation continues. In fact, according to the Enlightened, the spirit half of you is creating these realities for the sole purpose of becoming whole. There are things you must experience to grow that might not be your ego/personality’s first choice.
Unto the pure all things are pure; but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
—Titus 1:15
They call it karma: We did create, at some time in the past, whether recent or remote, all the conditions that we are faced with in this life. But how do all the karmas of all the people in the world interact? How does it all fit together? How do those happy (and unhappy) “coincidences” occur that are often the harbingers of a new world? Who is running the computer that can keep all of this straight, for 6 billion humans?
How Does It Work?
The universe IS the computer. Non-duality. And it doesn’t have to run. It is connected, entangled so that it is hooked into everything and is created from everything. It doesn’t respond to us—it is us.
The dualistic model of karma says: I hit Bob, so someone will hit me. It’s a very cause 
effect (a.k.a. Newtonian) way to view this phenomena. But from the non-dualistic, entangled model, it’s different. It says that action or thought (which are the same “thing”) arises in a piece of my consciousness. There is a certain frequency or vibration associated with that. By taking the action, I endorse that reality so that I am now connected to the universe by that frequency or vibration. Everything “out there” of the same frequency will respond to it,2 and they will then be reflected in your reality.
__________________
2 This is the principle that all transmission/reception works on. The transmitter and receiver are tuned to the same frequency.
By this notion, everything in your life—people, places, things, times and events—are nothing but reflections of your signature vibrations. According to Ramtha: “Everything in your life is frequency specific to who you are.” So if you want to know “Who Am I?” just look around; the universe is always serving up the answer.
The trouble is the hidden, repressed parts of us are also reflected, and we repress them because we don’t like them. It’s those reflections that make us say: “I would never create that.” And it’s that which keeps getting reflected back over and over until we understand it. That’s the wheel of karma. The un-merry-go-round. Or as a high-school philosopher once said, “Life’s a shit sandwich, and every day you take a bite.”
Said like a true victim.
“Gravity doesn’t exist; the earth sucks.” Ditto.
“Life’s a bitch, then you die.”
Victimization—Cure for the Current Reality
Perceiving one’s self as a victim is possibly the strongest rejection of “I create my reality.” And it happens all the time. The victim says: “This situation happened to me. It is unfair and unwarranted.” The corollaries of this are: “Poor me. The Universe is unjust. Karma is a part-time, fickle operation.”
The upside of this attitude is: You get sympathy, get to feel good about yourself because it’s not you, and can blow off the experience and not deal with your part in it.
The downside is: You just endorsed the idea that you don’t create your reality (and thus are disempowered to do so), and will get the lesson again and again, and . . . It also is a fragmentation from reality. It removes the Creator from the Creation.
A look at the reflection of this attitude in society at large shows how prevalent victimization is. So much of nightly news is centered on victims. In the United States, the victim mentality has reached epic proportions. If anything happens to someone, the first thing they do is look for someone to sue.
As Don Juan told Carlos Castaneda in Journey to Ixtlan: “You have been complaining all your life because you don’t assume responsibility for your decisions . . . look at me. I have no doubts or remorse. Everything I do is my decision and my responsibility.”
We are creating our own reality every day, though we find that very hard to accept—there’s nothing more exquisitely pleasant than to blame somebody else for the way we are. It’s her fault or his fault; it’s the system; it’s God; it’s my parents . . . Whatever way we observe the world around us is what comes back to us, and the reason why my life, for instance, is so lacking in joy and happiness and fulfillment is because my focus is lacking in those same things exactly.
—Miceal Ledwith
The Big Turnaround
As victimization is the strongest rejection of this chapter’s premise, “I accept responsibility” is the strongest acceptance of it. It is a monumental turnaround in the way anyone approaches the world and their experiences in it. Victimization and the powerlessness that ensues is gone from life. In every situation, the questions are asked, “Where am I, or what is I, in this situation? What is being reflected back to me? What level of ‘I-ness’ is this coming from?”
The turnaround is, instead of asking the universe to prove that you create reality so that you can sit on the fence and accept or reject what happens, you take it as a given that your life and its happenings are created by you, so therefore you look for the meaning in them. And by meaning, it’s not a philosophical, cosmic meaning, but rather what does this mean about who you are, or what you’re creating, or what in your life you are denying? Looking for change in your life? Make this switch and watch it transform before your many “I’s.”
“People are always blaming their circumstances for what they are,” said the great British playwright, George Bernard Shaw. “I don’t believe in circumstances. The people who get on in this world are the people who get up and look for the circumstances that they want, and if they can’t find them, make them.”
How do we make circumstances? How do we make those coincidences that have a huge effect on the direction of our life? It seems crazy that anyone could make a coincidence like: “Well, I forgot the paper, so I had to run back home, but on the way I got a flat tire. So I stopped to fix it and bent over and my pants split. So I wrapped a blanket around myself, and this person drives by, and it was a blanket that she had designed, so she stopped and then we got married.” It was just a coincidence. But what we really mean is it was a co–incident.
When the syllable “co” is before something, it means some type of interrelationship. Cooperate means to operate together. So coincident means the elements of the incident have an interrelationship. Strange that the word now means the opposite.
So did our happy husband create the flat tire? Or did he create being married, and the universe worked out the details? (These are the sorts of questions that come up once you get on the “I Create” bandwagon.) In experiments on creating the pH change in water, William Tiller says: “The issue of whether we do a detailed statement of intention, or if we do it in such a way that we leave it open for the universe to find a way to do it? Generally, it’s the latter.”
In other words, instead of dictating all the steps the water has to go through to change its pH, such as the rearrangement of chemical bonds, ion exchange, etc. . . . what the meditators in Dr. Tiller’s experiments do is focus on the result, and let the universe supply details, split pants and all.
Go confidently in the direction of your dreams. Live the life you’ve imagined.
—Henry David Thoreau
Possibilities and Time
Still the question remains—how could this all work? And how can someone become more conscious of the possibilities, so that creation itself is more conscious? According to Amit Goswami:
It is a hypothesis that consciousness is the ground of being. It’s all possibilities of consciousness. Out of these possibilities of itself, consciousness chooses the actual experience that it manifests, that it observes . . . quantum is talking about possibilities, but when you look at yourself, how many times have you wondered “what possibilities”? Your wondering of possibilities . . . [might be] confined to such trivial things like what kind of ice cream would I choose this time, vanilla or chocolate, which depends on your past experiences totally. So you miss the quantum physics of your life.
Dr. Goswami sees the possibilities in one’s life spread out like the probability waves of an electron. This means those options in your life are as “real” as those waves predicted by the Schrödinger equation. Stuart Hameroff takes this concept one step further:
Each conscious thought can be thought of as a choice, a quantum superposition collapsing to one choice. So let’s say you’re looking at a menu, and you’re trying to decide whether to have shrimp, pasta, tuna fish. Imagine that you have a quantum superposition of all these possibilities coexisting simultaneously. Maybe even you go into the future a little bit and taste the different meals. And then you decide, “Ah-ha. I’ll have spaghetti.”
Going into the future is not as science fictiony as it sounds. As Dr. Hameroff points out: “In quantum theory, you can also go backward in time, and there’s some suggestion that processes in the brain related to consciousness project backward in time.”
If all these theories prove to be correct, that means that an individual’s consciousness is constantly scanning all the future possibilities, maybe even going into the future to “taste” whether to marry someone or not, and then focusing, or collapsing that chosen possibility into reality. The “how” gets handled by the immensely interactive superintelligent universe that automatically responds to consciousness because that’s what it is. The universe IS the computer that keeps track—that’s why it’s here. And if it can create self-replicating, self-conscious life forms, it can fix a flat tire.
And how does this view make creation more conscious? Well, to many people the future is on the other side of a great wall, past which they cannot go. So those possibilities lurking out there are not seen, and when they do show up it’s a surprise, or a shock. But realizing that those potentials are real, and they can be developed, manipulated and collapsed, takes us over the wall and into the future where the new you awaits.
Creating Your Day
Your pool of created reality lies out in front of you. Smeared across the landscape of time, those possibilities await “the movement of consciousness” to bring the actual event into experience. But let’s say you’re a bit more proactive—a landscape activist who isn’t willing to sit back and let the weeds of the universe happen to you, but rather seed that landscape of possibilities with your conscious creations.
The most popular, captivating, requested information in What the BLEEP was the concept of creating your day. This technique was first taught by Ramtha in 1992 to his students and is one of the cornerstones of the school in Yelm, Washington: “No masters worth their salt ever let the day happen to them; rather, they create their day.”
This marvelous teaching addresses the “I” that has ultimately been the subject of this chapter. Who is the “I” that is creating? If it’s the personality, then the creations are from the existing structures, habits, propensities, neuronets, and from that old personality structure, all that will be created is the same old, same old. Creating what has already been is hardly creating.
Or creating is coming from the higher self, the God self, in which case it’s usually unconscious and the workings of some deeply buried karma. So while the creations are wonderful to the spirit, to the disconnected personality, they seem arbitrary, unfair, and give rise to the feelings of powerlessness and victimization.
Life isn’t about finding yourself. Life is about creating yourself.
—George Bernard Shaw
Whereas this technique takes advantage of the moment of no-self, or, new-self. From this “I” something truly new can be manifested. Something that you consciously create. And to create this way forever undoes the trap of victimization and disempowerment.
And it affirms every day, in a very real way, that you create your reality.
And if that is true, the affirmation is gas on the fire.
Ponder These for a While . . .
• What are the limits, if any, to our creativity and power?
• Can we change the laws of physics? If so, are they laws? What are laws?
• Learning to create more effectively, what kind of responsibility do we have?
• What is the most constructive use of our creativity?
• How can we know that our individual aims are aligned with cosmic aims?
• What is the impact of knowing that we are creating all the time, whether consciously or not?
• What is the difference between the personality and the higher level of consciousness?
• How do I know the difference?
• When do I know my personality is creating, or when do I know it’s my higher consciousness?
• Is my personality bad?