I left a remark insufficiently explained last post: “Your consciousness begins your physical life far less local to your body.” This is much more literally true than most people understand.
With Erickson it was a matter of observation — for example, he saw babies reaching out to touch their right hand with their right hand. You are not born knowing where “me” is, and you are not born physically coinciding with it. Your body begins as a marker — partly a cultural marker.But the modern perinatalist observations have confirmed this far more strongly. Grof has a lot, and another great resource is hypnotherapist David Chamberlain. See for example his paper in Leskowitz, ed. Transpersonal Hypnotherapy (2010). Here you find hypnotised clients seeing the moment of their birth and finding that they had great awareness of the surroundings, an awareness not completely local to the body. They describe “knowing I have to put myself in that baby body”. There can also be memories of full-blown OBE as a baby.
The mind at that stage seems very intelligent, as Erickson would predict of what will become the unconscious mind. One patient, Deborah, says for example: “I felt I knew a lot — I really did. I thought I was pretty intelligent. I never thought about being a person, just a mind… I saw all these people acting crazy [about her delivery as a baby]. That’s when I thought I had a more intelligent mind, because I knew what the situation was with me, and they didn’t seem to. They seemed to ignore me. They were doing things to me, to the outside of me. But they acted like that’s all there was.”
“Not a person, just a mind” — exactly what we mean by not being hooked in to the cultural and physical body. This mind knows a context culture does not. Hence the perceptiveness and objectivity. The baby is mind-aware but the adults are only personality-aware. Adults have gone through that twofold process of identifying with the body, then with the culture. The tiny infant has not. “They seemed to ignore me”, meaning, my real self, but also their real selves — this being equivalent as we’ve seen to being caught in a mask or “estrangement” from the underlying.
This underlying self really is a lot “smarter” which is why, if you can have a relationship with it and activate it, you become a much richer version of yourself.
Inner selves shouting for attention are related of course to younger subpersonalities and hence to parts of the mind shut out by the social realm. Clearing the walls that shut out those selves clears the tension and the blocks to those awarenesses, and that becomes a live relationship with the nonphysical. You interact with other forms of input. “Extra sensory perception” is a cliché, like all parapsychological terms once the public gets hold of them, but all it means is perception on the part of that aspect of you which is not directly hooked into the body. That turns out to be a lot.
The irony is that the hooking-in tends to leave a lot of energetic blockages, so a new and clearer relationship with the body is actually far better for the body itself as well. Normal egotistical relations with the body aren’t helpful to its health at all.
This goes all the way up to enlightenment which can create what some have called a “duplex personality”… more on that in the upcoming series.