The Universe is a sentient and complete Reality, within which there is only illusory division and separation. Just as elements, falsely perceived as divided and separate from the Whole have Consciousness, so do must the System which ALL are contained within have consciousness. Just as water is not merely hydrogen and oxygen, but is certainly the sum of both as well as the transcendent properties that emerge from their unity, so too must the Universe contain all consciousness within it, as well as the transcendent properties of Consciousness which emerge when taken as a whole and singular unity of existence (Wahdat al-Wujud). As the T’ien Shi taught, two thousand years ago: “The Tao THINKS of YOU! (想爾道)”
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
“Come, let us reason together…” – Isaiah (Yeshayahu) 1.18
The scientific journal Nature’s Scientific Reports, published November 16 of 2012, argued compelling that the Universe itself may grow, replicating itself, projecting “out,” in the same way that a giant brain grows. According to a new computer simulation, researchers claimed that it appears some undiscovered, fundamental laws may govern the growth of systems large and small, from the electrical firing between brain cells and growth of social networks to the expansion of galaxies.
“Natural growth dynamics are the same for different real networks, like the Internet or the brain or social networks,” said Dmitri Krioukov, co-author of the study published by the Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis (CAIDA), based at the San Diego Supercomputer Center (SDSC) at the University of California, San Diego. While not going so far as to “claim that the universe is a global brain or a computer,” Krioukov cautioned, “the discovered equivalence between the growth of the universe and complex networks strongly suggests that unexpectedly similar laws govern the dynamics of these very different complex systems.”
Kevin Bassler of the University of Houston, who was not involved in the study, explained that the new study suggests a single fundamental law of nature may govern these networks, said physicist, “At first blush they seem to be quite different systems, the question is, is there some kind of controlling laws can describe them?”
Using Einstein’s equations of relativity, which explain how matter warps the fabric of space-time, physicists can retrace the universe’s explosive birth in the Big Bang roughly 14 billion years ago and how it has expanded outward in the eons since. Krioukov’s team wondered whether the Universe’s accelerating growth could provide insight into the ways social networks or brain circuits expand. The team created a computer simulation that broke the early universe into the tiniest possible units — quanta of space-time more minuscule than subatomic particles. The simulation linked any quanta, or nodes in a massive celestial network, that were causally related. As the simulation progressed, it added more and more space-time to the history of the universe, and so its “network” connections between matter in galaxies, grew as well.
Simple mapping between the two surfaces representing the geometries of the universe and complex networks proves that their large-scale growth dynamics and structures are similar.
When the team compared the universe’s history with growth of social networks and brain circuits, they discovered something remarkable: all the networks expanded in similar ways. They balanced links between similar nodes with ones that already had many connections. An example given to illustrate this: “a cat lover surfing the Internet may visit mega-sites such as Google or Yahoo, but will also browse cat fancier websites or YouTube kitten videos. In the same way, neighboring brain cells like to connect, but neurons also link to such ‘Google brain cells’ that are hooked up to loads of other brain cells.” Krioukov explained that this is a “pattern” not simply a “coincidence.” He further explained that it’s more likely that some unknown law governs the way networks grow and change, from the smallest brain cells to the growth of mega-galaxies: “For a physicist it’s an immediate signal that there is some missing understanding of how nature works… This result suggests that maybe we should start looking for it.”
SDSC Director Michael Norman exclaimed, “Who would have guessed that the emergence of our universe’s four-dimensional spacetime from the quantum vacuum would have anything to do with the growth of the Internet? Causality is at the heart of both, so perhaps the similarity Krioukov and his collaborators found is to be expected.”
There is existence. We are aware, or “conscious.” We cannot doubt the existence (whether “real” or “illusory” makes no difference) of something, because doubt itself is a form of awareness. We lump together all that of which we are aware under the convenient name of “Existence;” what the Sufi calls “Wujud.” We know that we exist by our contemplation upon the matter of our existence; that is “i think therefore i am” (“Cogito ergo sum”).
“Ac proinde haec cognitio, ego cogito, ergo sum, est omnium prima et certis sima etc.” The argument that is usually summarized as “cogito ergo sum” appears in Meditations on First Philosophy, in which René Descartes attempts to build an entire philosophical system from scratch, with no prior assumptions. Although the ideas expressed in “cogito ergo sum” are most commonly associated with Descartes, they were present in many of his antecedents, notably in Saint Augustine in Confessions. It is from here, from this philosophical foundation, that all philosophies and arguments regarding existence itself or the existence of a Higher Power must be constructed.
In order to begin this undertaking, Descartes reasoned that since all his beliefs were derived from potentially misleading sensory data or potentially fallacious logic, he would trust nothing he had previously taken to be true. That is to say, he would systematically doubt all that could conceivably be doubted. However, this led him to discover that the one thing that he cannot doubt is his own existence. He claims, quite correctly, something nonexistent is incapable even of the act of doubting. Accordingly, the formulation, “I think, therefore I am,” was the starting point of his philosophy. Thus, it is with this similar starting point that we too begin.
Some have criticized this argument on the grounds that it is a tautological, or circular argument, in that the statement “I think” already contains the notion of “I,” and thus presupposes existence. However, in reality this is not so. The fact that there is a questioning of existence by something, WHATEVER it is that we that question are, is proof of existence itself. Thus, we return back to the fundamental truth that that which THINKS by definition IS or exists. We know that within existence are those who have the capacity to contemplate their own existence, and are thus “conscious.”
Within the observable reality, the empirical data suggests that all things are what Arthur Koestler termed “Holons” (i.e. “Whole‐Parts”); meaning that something is both an individual “Whole” and simultaneously a “Part” of something greater than itself which it is contained within. The term itself is a combination from the Greek holos (whole), with the suffix on which, as in proton or neutron, suggests a particle or part.
Two observations impelled Koestler to propose the word holon. The first comes from Herbert Simon, a Nobel Prize winner, and is based on his “parable of the two watchmakers,” Hora and Tempus. From this parable, Simon concludes that complex systems will evolve from simple systems much more rapidly if there are stable intermediate forms than if there are not; the resulting complex systems in the former case will be hierarchic.
The second observation, made by Koestler while analyzing hierarchies and stable intermediate forms in living organisms and social organization, is that although it is easy to identify sub‐wholes or whole‐parts and “parts” in an absolute sense do not exist anywhere. This made Koestler propose the word “holon” to describe the hybrid nature of sub-wholes/parts in real‐life systems; holons simultaneously are self‐contained wholes to their subordinated parts, and dependent parts when seen from the inverse direction.
Koestler also establishes the link between holons and the watchmakers’ parable from professor Simon. He points out that the sub‐wholes/holons are autonomous self‐reliant units, which have a degree of independence and handle contingencies without asking higher authorities for instructions. Simultaneously, holons are subject to control from multiple higher authorities. The first property ensures that holons are stable forms, which survive disturbances. The latter property signifies that they are intermediate forms, which provide the proper functionality for the bigger whole.
Thus, a proton, neutron or electron is a holon of an Atom. It is unique itself, yet an Atom contains all of its properties AND transcendent properties that emerge from the TOTALITY of the Whole. Similar, a molecule contains the properties of each atom within it AND the transcendent properties that emerge from the TOTALITY of the Molecule. A Quark contains the properties of each molecule within it AND the transcendent properties that emerge from the TOTALITY of the quark. A cell contains the properties of each quark within it AND the transcendent properties that emerge from the TOTALITY of the cell. An organism contains the properties of each cell within it AND the transcendent properties that emerge from the TOTALITY of the organism. This continues all the way up the “Ladder” of Creation, so to speak until we get to the planets being part of the Solar System, the Galaxies containing all within them, yet also the transcendent properties unique to the Totality of the Galaxy. This continues then on to the ENTIRE Universe; which i am presenting as the “matrix” of the Divine Mind within which ALL are thoughts.
Thus, the Universe contains EVERYTHING within it, AND the transcendent properties that emerge from the TOTALITY of the WHOLE. So, put simply, the WHOLE of the UNIVERSE is the construct of the DIVINE MIND, and ALL within it are thought‐parts.
The skeptic may then say “But how can you claim the Universe is MIND when it is physicality? How can you make the leap that the Universe has a Mind when we only see empirical evidence of physicality?”
The answer is simple. The Whole can NEVER be absent of the traits of the PARTS within it. Thus, if WE have mind and we are PART of the Universe, then the Universe LOGICALLY MUST have Mind, but to a more TOTAL and COMPLETE degree than the thought‐parts within It. Thus, there is JUST AS MUCH proof that the Universe Itself has Mind, as there is that WE have mind. Our mind is merely a particle of mind within the COMPLETE and TOTAL Mind of the WHOLE. Thus, logically, the Universal Mind must AT LEAST be as conscious, aware and mindful as the SUM of ALL thought within the Universe. However, just as in the case of unique properties emerging when protons, neutrons and electrons are combined to make an atom, we also can logically deduce that there are unique properties associated with the TOTALITY of Mind, that makes it greater and more unique than the sum of all thought within It.
Thus, the conclusion is that there is not only a Higher Power that is MORE than the Sum of ALL things, or “Whole‐Parts” within the Universe, but that It is ALSO empirically discernible as a CONSCIOUS Higher Power, since Consciousness exists within It. Thus, this Higher Power is the origin of ALL things, and is not only as great as the sum of ALL power and consciousness within Reality, but that It also contains transcendent properties BEYOND the sum of all things, in exactly the same way as all other Wholes contain transcendent properties beyond the sum of their parts.
We conclude that this Higher Power is by “Nature” so far beyond, so much more transcendent beyond us, that we cannot view ourselves as parts of It the same way that a grain of sand is physically a part of a beach or a drop of water physically part of the ocean. We instead realize that just as Descartes realized that no presumptions could be taken for granted, we neither should assume that the physical world, our physical bodies, and the Universe itself is the Ultimate “Reality.” The Reality Itself is the Higher Power that we can rationally deduce Exists. Thus, whilst we can deduce that there is existence to that which questions existence, we CANNOT take for granted that these “personalities” or “egos” that we have been conditioned to accept as our “selves.”
Before any, there existed something formless yet complete, before the Heavens and the Earth, without sound or substance ‐ yet the Source of both ‐ depending on Nothing, unchanging, yet constantly in‐flux. All pervading, unfailing. For It there was no beginning and shall be no end. For It is the Beginning and the End. Its End is in Its Beginning and Its Beginning in its End. By It the entire Universe was given form. This is THAT which we define as “Consciousness” as the “Higher Power.” In the East it is THAT which was referred to by the prophets and sages ‐ such as almost mythic Laozi ‐ as the “Tao.” Modern day, “Taoists” have strayed so far from the teachings of such Prophets ‐ not only in creating “isms” out of an original expression of submission to the ways and channels of Life ‐ but also in abandoning the empirical reasoning that PROVES that the Tao MUST be AT LEAST as Conscious and deliberate as the SUM of all Consciousness within Existence, and THEN even MORE so, by nature of the transcendent properties which emerge uniquely within the WHOLE; beyond the mere sum of Its parts. This fact is evidenced in that the originators of religious Taoism, the T’ien Shi (Celestial Masters), left behind their exegetical legacy of the “Xiang Er” commentary on the Daodejing (or Tao Te Ching; a work meaning “the Tao thinks of you” (想爾道). That is to say, the earliest formal communities of Taoists, universally accepted by the Scholarly community as the origins of Taoism itself, viewed the Tao as absolutely conscious and concerned with moral uprightness. It would only emerge much later that certain Taoist Orders (not all), would come to view such concerns as antithetical to the Tao.
If there was Nothing in existence in the time “before creation,” (or existence), and since there was not anything which was brought into existence independent of its Creator, then ALL, that has ever been, was given form from this; the very BEING of this, THAT which we term the Divine (by whatever name of cultural expression). For if not, then anything that existed independently of this Source would be a “god,” having been made from something that did not originate from It. If this were the case then the entire Universe would be in disarray and these hypothetical “gods” would be in competition with each other for dominance.
Therefore, since All was formed from the very Essence, the Substantive expression of the Mind, ‐ or Thought Construct within the Mind ‐ then all of the reflections of the “Force,” (that drives all things to live in the perfect balance of the Straight Path), through introspection can follow the internal road map to life, permeating the entirety of the manifest world so often called creation. It is here where our internal, intuitive knowledge lies dormant. This can be studied not only through empirical observation of this Mental Construct of the Divine Mind (referred to herein as the “Universe”), but also through communication of the Divine MIND to Its individual THOUGHTS. Such a process is what has been known in the Abrahamic traditions as “Prophethood.” This not only occurs on a subtle level that pervades all of the Universal Construct of the Mind (in what we call our “Nature”), but also on a deliberate level of the Mind waking up particularly conscious and elucidated thoughts to Higher Realities. This occurs firstly on the level of what Islam calls “Muhaddathin” (those who are spoken to) and secondarily to those who are then visited by a species of more advanced, extraterrestrial life which the Qur’an calls the “Mala’ikah” (commonly translated as “Angels”), from the Hebrew “Malakhim” or “Messengers.” This is something inherent to higher consciousness; a matter of the human mind subtly interpreting a science of probabilities on a heightened level.
Faith is not the only justification for this spiritual doctrine of the Mind’s communication within Itself to Its thought‐creations. This “Higher Law” is hard‐wired into all of Reality. It is what dictates the Truth of what must be done to succeed the most productively and harmoniously with a given set of variables. That which drives us to engage each other sexually and reproduce, as a result of sensory or psychological arousal, to nourish our bodies when we are hungry, to sleep when tired, to fight when in danger and to flee when the odds are stacked against us.
This same Force drives the groundhog to judge the coming climactic conditions by the cast of the sun’s rays. Our Creator, (Allah, YHVH or whatever terminology one may refer to It in), is a constant example of the Truth which we are to live in SUBMISSION to if we wish to survive (in this world and the next), and do what is right. All that one needs to do is look, there in the beautiful workings of Nature, to see the very Force permeating the entire Universe and all that dwelling within and animating the workings of the world around us. This can be observed in the life which surrounds us all, expressions of the consciousness of the Mind ‐ accordingly making the Supreme Source of Power self‐evident to all who can truly see.
If there was not anything brought into existence independent of its Creator, then All, that has ever been, was given form from This; the very Existence and Substance of the Divine Mind. For if not, then anything that existed independently of this Source would be a “god” having been made from something that did not originate from It However, since all of creation was formed from the very essence of God then all of the reflections of the “Force,” through introspection, can follow the internal “road map to life” found throughout Reality.
In Jewish and Islamic thought ascribing partners to God is the most grievous of sins. This is for the simple reason that such a perspective is the misguided belief in separateness and duality; the belief that the individual is an independent island. It is the root of duality, false notions of separation, ego and all sins. Thus, in Islam it is suggested that sin of “shirk” cannot be forgiven. The Sufi would maintain that this is because such a sin can only be awakened from. Such iconoclastic perspectives can be traced back to the Biblical narratives of Abraham himself, to the Midrashim and Aggadot surrounding his years in ancient Babylon, and to the origin of Anti‐Semitism, as Agricultural Civilizations’ backlash against the Haberu apostasy of tribal unity, nomadism and a perception of the singularity of life. To the Sufi, this doctrine of Absolute “Tawhid” or Unity of Allah states that, “There is NOTHING – no god in the heavens above, nor god‐man on the Earth below – there is ONLY Allah, the Divine Itself.”
Ironically it is the perspective of fundamentalists, of any traditions, to claim that there is something “other than” God. If one says that “they” are other than God, then out of “what” did God “create” them? Out of “what” did God create that which It made you? And out of “what” was that created? Essentially if it was of something “other than” a FINITE FACET of God’s INFINITE essence, then that something is a god. THAT is polytheism, and THAT is limiting the Limitless.
We are manifested of God’s Infinite Will within Itself. If one dreams of that which Is Real then the dream is not illusory, it is a reflection of what has been or what will be. If I dream of what will happen tomorrow, then my dream was not “make‐believe” it was pure Intellect bestowed from the One. That is the sort of “dream” that we are a part of. This dream is Real, but a dream nonetheless. Muhammad expressed this saying: “In life mankind is asleep, when one dies they wake up.”
The “I” does NOT exist. The “I” is an illusion, only God is Real. Ill Allahu, there is only Allah. God is the Infinite, we are the finite. God is Independent, we are dependent. A cell within a body is NOT the Total Being; yet it IS within it. A drop of water is NOT the Ocean but it is a tiny, finite FACET of the Ocean. A grain of sand is NOT the Beach, but it is a finite particle of the Beach. Does this mean that we are “parts” of God the same way as a drop of water is a “part” of the “whole” ocean, or a grain of sand is a “part” of the “whole” beach? No. It means that we are “parts,” THOUGHT‐parts, of the CONSTRUCT of God’s Mind. The CONSTRUCT itself is by definition “Creation,” but that “Construct” is not “Reality” in and of itself. God Itself is the Ultimately Reality, what the Sufi calls “Haqiqah,” the Sefirah which the M’qbali (Kabbalist) refers to as “T’firet.” To say that we are “Parts” of God is to accept the misguided notion that the CONSTRUCT of the Mind is the Reality within which the Mind is. The Reality is that the Mind is That OF the Reality, That OF God. Within the Construct of That Mind is ALL that we know, and do not know; all that we can observe and all that we cannot. Within this Universal Construct of the Divine Mind is ALL. We must understand this with discernment.
The drops of water in the Ocean and the grains of sand on the Beach are Real, but ONLY when seen as part of the Totality of the Construct of the Mind itself (which is real). When limited to themselves they are not Real.
When a grain of sand says that it can stand alone as the entire Beach, then it is deluded by its ego, and has fallen into the false perception of shirk. But likewise, it is also incorrect to think that you are a grain of sand, “separate” from the Reality. Such a person perceives that around them are only other grains of sand, the Beach is real but it is off somewhere else where they have never seen, and “we” are absolutely unrelated to It.
One must NEVER say that a particle is the Whole. God is the Whole “we” are the particle. But God tells us “we” cannot divide the Whole of It; so far be it from us to consider anything as “separate” from It. Similarly, a thought cannot claim logically to be a part of the Mind. The Mind is One, and the thoughts are mere ILLUSIONS. Thus, there is NO “us” there is ONLY the Mind that is THAT which generates the Universal Construct within Itself.
We are limited, God is unlimited. We are finite expressions of Itself within Its own Universal Consciousness, and the Mathematical Construct thereof. It is Infinite. It is through the manifest that we can reflect upon signs in order to Know the Source Matter is a manifestation (or “expression” if you will), of Spirit.
There is Nothing, only God. If we are not created of the Essence of God then of “what” are we created? Where did that purported material come from? If it came from anything “other than” God, then we have just ascribed a partner to God. We have then said “There is God and there is this ‘other’ substance which It made us from.” This is NOT the case. We must not be afraid of this Reality; we must seek to understand it.
What is being said here is that God neither begets (i.e. “creates outside of Itself”), nor is begotten (i.e. “there is Nothing else for It to be created out of”). God did NOT “break off” a piece of Itself. For “where” would this piece be broken off too? What would lay between the cracks that would signify the “break”? Where else could It “put” those broken pieces other than within Its Infinite and Omnipresent Existence.
God is the One, Ahad to the Muslim, Echad to the Jew; indivisible. There is Nothing, only It. We are WITHIN Its Mind, though not within any sort of physical body (jism). We are certainly NOT WITHOUT, or OUTSIDE OF some “god in the sky” created from the mythologies of alien to tribal humankind; attempting to explain phenomenon outside of their understanding. That is why we are dependent upon It. If we were “somewhere else” then we would by nature be dependent upon that “place” which we were. But we are here. There is no there, there is only here; the here that is the reality. We are in reality, a part of reality, inseparable from reality and thus must accept reality.
 Michael Rundle, “Physicists Find Evidence That The Universe Is A ‘Giant Brain’“ Huffington Post UK (November 27, 2012 http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/27/physicists-universe-giant-brain_n_2196346.html
 Jan Zverina, Human Brain, Internet, and Cosmology: Similar Laws at Work? University Communications and Public Affairs News Center, UCSD (November 19, 2012)
 John Cottingham, Meditations on First Philosophy, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).
 Koestler, A. (1968). The Ghost in the Machine. McMillan: New York.
 This is the original etymological meaning of the pictogram “Tao.” (道)
 For a much more detailed investigation into this matter, consult “Virtue and the Way: Cultivating Flood‐like Qi.” This work deals with some of these issues, but also the centrality of “Virtue” (De), in the Laozi text.
 “Power” would actually be a more accurate term, as expressed in the aforementioned “Virtue and the Way,” as well as in “Power versus Force.” Interestingly, this is a Qur’anic expression for the Divine, “Al‐Qadar.”
 In the Islamic tradition it would be expanded to state that a Prophet is strictly one appointed by the Angelic Council to take a message to a people. The general communicators with the Divine Mind are therein – within Ahadith literature – termed “Muhaddathun,” or “those who talk.” Prophets, Islam declares, are appointed by third parties of an administrative hierarchy, from amongst these. In any event, cultural semantics and linguistic specifications aside, the Biblical prophets implied either the Islamic status of Nabi (Prophet) or Muhaddath.
 How does God tell us this? At this point of the argument, it has been established through reason that the Construct of the Universe must have at least the Sum of all Consciousness, as well as transcendent properties emergent from this holon relationship. As such, with the argument thus made, it is reasonable that the Mind can communicate with the thoughts and vice versa. Accordingly, when there are figures who emerge with sacred writ beyond the knowledge of people of their day, claiming to have originated from this Mind‐thought connection, it is reasonable that we might approach this with an open mind.