Maya, Matrix, and Matter
Apparently, a growing number of physicists are of the conviction that “our world is a simulation“. Nothing really new there, is there? It’s the meaning of Maya, or “Cloud of Unknowing”, which is ancient knowledge now being apparently “uploaded”, if we want to use that term, into the matrix of the mental-rational consciousness, where it appears now as “simulation”. This also belongs to the return of ancient knowledge, but I see no reason for it to be massaged into a technical idiom.
There is also a problem with the term “simulation”, as it implies that what we call “world” or “reality” is only a similitude of a world or of reality. But that implies that one already knows what the authentically real is.
Maya, Matrix, and Matter are all related words, just as Reason and Reality are related words that emerge and branch off from the same root, much like the serpent’s tongue. Reason and reality were co-evolutionary as much as, today, we speak of consciousness and cosmos as being reciprocal or co-evolutionary, or as dialogical, as in Ilya Prigogine’s “New Dialogue with Nature”.
The “simulation” was already known to William Blake. He called it “Ulro” or a “Cloud”, the fallen world, in which the things of this world are simply similitudes of their Eternal Forms, otherwise known as “the archetypes”. The body itself is a similitude of the soul. The body is a “cloud” which disguises the eternal form which it manifests, physically, in time and space.
Dr. Terrile, from NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, thinks the simulation is being constructed by our “future selves” and we are living in their simulation — the matrix of matter. We are, in a sense, the dreamings of our “future selves” and so in that sense it affirms that “you create the reality you know”.
Well, you could put it that way, I suppose, if only in the sense that Gebser’s “Diaphainon” and “integral consciousness” is a “future self”. Otherwise, it’s quite nonsense to speak of a “future self” here sort of engineering a past world in which we live, move, and have our being as if it were a real world. If there is such a “future self” it is only in the form of soul’s awakening to the fact that consciousness creates form, and not vice versa, through the “magic” of intentionality, and not according to a computer programme.
In those terms, this “future self” exists as “future self” only in the sense that it is what we are destined to become, because it is implicitly and latently what we are already. It is already what is referred to as “Oversoul“.
The “simulation” is Lila, a word which, apparently, has a suggestive double meaning as both “play” and “night”, and in that sense also has some meaningful connection with the “Ulro”. That is to say, when the Ulro is transparent, it is Lila as “play”. When the Ulro is not transparent, or translucent, it is Lila as “night”. These are issues of perception and of cleansing “the doors of perception”.
Dr. Terrile’s metaphor — for that is what it is, and it isn’t “real” itself — of a world as computer-generated simulation may be appropriate to a technical mentality, but it is just a metaphor for what is already ancient knowledge. Reality is indeed “information”, if you want to put it that way, although its better to call it “symbolic form” or “dialogue” rather than “algorithm” in which consciousness and cosmos are in a continuous conversation.
Information is energy. Energy is information. It does indeed flow in both directions, from consciousness to cosmos, and from cosmos to consciousness. If flows as well from past to future, and from future to past, in our terms. You can call it “simulation” only in the sense that these flows of energy assume perceptible symbolic forms or patterns or Gestalts, which, when such are perceived transparently as symbolic forms, are “dharma” or “Lila“, but when not transparent, but opaque to perception and insight, are Maya. Otherwise called the “Ulro”.