Do you see consciousness as the Absolute, or as an emanation?

[Night Owl]

Now obviously, our simple 3rd density sleep is not going to be comparable to the majesty of the octave, but it could be symbolically reflective of its archetypal nature. It is the place where chaos (red ray) and order (violet ray) somehow come to mean the same "essence".

One thing that perplexes me is the octave becomes the 1st density of the next octave, but in Ra's cosmology it is clear that things are created from the top down (greater to lesser). Even on the Tree of Life, the lightening path of creation goes from the top down. So I am at a loss to reconcile this paradox. I have a few theories, but they are still in the 75% cooked stage.  

I found that pretty humorous somehow, I'm pretty sure you already know the answer. And even within your post it feels like you question your own answer to the question you attempt to answer first.

Red ray ascend, violet ray descend. There is no real top or bottom I believe, only the middle of somewhere relative to these concepts at the moment they are observered. Just like your avatar. That's why they appear as a paradox but actually it is not a paradox. It is simply that the process of creation is a 2 way process. Creation and destruction work hand in hand. The light and the dark, the yin and the yang. As long as we are not into the source level, we experience duality, and so everything is dual, every concept, idea, thought, it's all dual. Every answer to every question is then some kind of yes/no it depends on the perspective. We experience a meeting of two states, a reflection. The path that this idea has taken to get into this thread is dual all along. It needs to pass by identity, mind/body complex, language which is based on communication between 2 indivi''duals'', then thinker, writer, reader, all are dual concepts that involves a reflection process.

The word conscious, from what I have read comes from the latin root ''con scio''. I found that on a website somewhere I cannot find back sadly. When I try to search it now I find there are multiple different roots to the word depending if you search conscious conscience consciousness and according to different websites. But basically con scio means ''with seperation''. It makes sense to me that as soon as there is a thought it is some kind of abstraction of this idea from the source and so everything that we experience as awareness is the duality of the thought. Is it absolute? I would say the absolute is probably the source and this is not what we experience. We come from it, but essentilly we are cut off from it, that's why so many things appear as paradoxes, we can't reconcile our seperation. So I believe consciousness is duality. From there, there is a consistant bidirectional flow of seperation and integreation that is essentially one process. The question is, if the source contains everything and is in a fixed state, is it aware or is awareness also the byproduct of consciousness. In a way, we could relate that to the human brain, being that the conscious mind is active but has little to no actual content, and the unconscious contains everything, but it's never really into the present, acting and driving, it's always like a background process, like memory. If the source is like the unconscious, then it is still some kind of awareness, just like barely awareness, probably awareness like someone on alzheimer that's so much into the present state that nothing else is really taken into account. And consciousness would be like the completely aware drive to remerge within itself. That would make sense under the idea that macro and micro are a reflection of one another. But then there is the possibility that this is not the case in which case we have very limited ways to even ponder about the question.