Dude, whoa. I had this flash of a thought this morning equating consciousness, or the origin of consciousness, or maybe sentience, with dark energy, an as-of-yet unknown and mysterious force hypothesized to comprise almost 75% of the total universe. However, in the bright light of day, the idea is a bit too grandiose and far-fetched.

I must have been such a hippie in the 60's. Deep, man.

The way I figure it, my spiritual investigation into existence needs to delve into the origins of human consciousness. I don't believe in a "God" that is separate from ourselves that arbitrarily created us just to arbitrarily judge us in the end. That concept makes so little sense that I don't even know where to begin about how little sense it makes. It's so fraught with human projection that how it could possibly be regarded as "divine" is beyond me.

Delving into human consciousness in the grand scheme of things runs into the problem that human beings are bit players in the grand scheme of things. Spirituality tries to attach some meaning to our existence in the grand scheme of things, but if the history of the universe was placed on a 12 month calendar, humans occupy hardly a few seconds approaching midnight on December 31st.

There might be spiritual meaning to our existence, but it needs to take into consideration that our individual lives are just not that important.

So I try to trace back human consciousness to its beginning, to its source. Where did it come from? What is it in the grand scheme of things? How did the universe come from a place where human consciousness did not exist to get to a place where it did exist?

I think about how did this planet come from a place where life did not exist to get to a place where life did exist. The current theory is that all the naturally occuring elements required for organic life were present on this planet, as they are suspected of existing on numerous planets throughout the universe. The combination is not uncommon.

We had the "primordial soup", we had an atmosphere, and with all the conditions in place, energy, in the form of naturally occuring lightning, created the first amino acids, which became the building blocks for life. It's so simple and not uncommon that it is hypothesized that the universe is teeming with organic life.

Getting to sentience, much less human sentience and consciousness, is another matter. It may have been a long development of evolution for it to come into being, but what is its source? What is the ground out of which it was able to develop?

So I was just playing with the idea of how little we know. Almost 75% of the universe is completely unknown in what we're arbitrarily calling "dark energy" in affirmative pronouncement, as well as denial, of our ignorance.

Then I think of the theorized 4% of what comprises the observable universe, all we can detect, all that we know about. Much of it is known in various forms of electro-magnetic energy. 75% "dark energy". 4% known energy. My thought came out of thinking that dark energy isn't this one monolithic thing, that there are multiple, multiple, multiple types of "dark energy" as there are electro-magnetic energy, permeating the universe.

And as it may have been lightning that provided the energy to catalyze the formation of life on this arbitrary planet, I'm wondering if something similar might have happened to form sentience or consciousness, or human consciousness out of some refined form of what we're calling dark energy which permeates the universe. It's everywhere, it's here right now, we just can't detect it, just as we can't detect consciousness.

I'm seriously not proposing this at all seriously.

What I am proposing is that human consciousness is a form of something that is naturally formed by natural elements that exist in the universe, albeit exotic to our current scientific understanding. It may be rare. It may be unique in the specific form it has taken on this planet. But in the grand scheme of things it's not something uncommon or mystical.

Even in a spiritual interpretation, what we're deeming "spiritual" is something naturally occuring in the dark energy. Spirituality is the best scientific tool we have to investigate this natural phenomenon. That is what I think spirituality should be, not the garbage organized religions brainwash people to think and believe.

A spiritual investigation into the nature of the self, consciousness, and existence should not lead people to oppress, persecute, or denigrate other people. It should not try to teach people 'what is', implying that other beliefs are 'what is not'.

Now, for Buddhists, that ground of reality, consciousness, and existence is the ultimate reality, referred to as Buddha nature. It is the ultimate, the absolute – non-created, non-destroyed, non-dualistic, all things inextricably interconnected. The form Buddhism took on this planet, with its ideals of compassion and equanimity, was more or less a fabrication by living beings on this planet necessary to promote interest in these teachings of well-being and respect for other beings as a means of striving for enlightenment.

Is the essence of Buddhist teaching naturally formed? That's what I'm suggesting. But then there's a reason why Buddhism is so consonant with science, more so than God-based spiritualities. I'm not suggesting either way is right or wrong. Just what makes sense to me.

soundtrack:
1. Fireplace (REM)
2. The Smartest Monkeys (XTC)
3. Change It (live) (Stevie Ray Vaughan & Double Trouble)
4. She (Suede)
5. (Just Like) Starting Over (John Lennon)
6. Strawberry Fields Forever (Take 7 & Edit Piece) (The Beatles)
7. I Can't Imagine the World Without Me (Echobelly)
8. Rudy (live) (Supertramp)
9. One More Day (The Neville Brothers)
10. Tell Him (Lauryn Hill)