Inert matter possesses self-consciousness

[inavalan]

"Evolution does not of course apply only to the human species, and as I have said consciousness on your plane exists in all things. When your friend asked his question he was, I believe, referring to the point at which self-consciousness entered into so-called inert form.

You know now that so-called inert form has consciousness. To some degree it even possesses self-consciousness, and so there is no point at which self-consciousness entered, so to speak, with the sound of trumpets. Consciousness, to a degree, was inherent in the first materialization physically upon your plane.

Self-consciousness entered in very shortly after, but not what you are pleased to call human self-consciousness. I certainly do not like to wound your egos in this manner. However the fact remains, and I can hear you all yell foul, that there is no actual differentiation between the various types of self-consciousness.

You are either conscious of self or you are not. On your plane self-consciousness exists as a rule. A tree is conscious of itself as a tree. It does not think of itself as a rock. A dog knows it is not a cat. What I am trying to point out to you here is this supreme egotistical presumption that self-consciousness must of necessity involve humanity per se. It does not.

[... 1 paragraph ...]

So-called human consciousness did not suddenly appear. Our poor maligned friend, the ape, did not suddenly beat his hairy chest in exaltation and cry "I am a man." There was no such point and this, if you will forgive my pun, is my point.

The beginnings of human consciousness, on the other hand, began as soon as multicellular groupings began to form in field patterns of a certain complexity. While there was no specific point of entry as far as human consciousness was concerned, there was a point before which human consciousness as such did not exist. Self-consciousness did exist. The consciousness of being human in your terms was fully developed in the caveman, but—and I cannot emphasize this enough—the human conception was alive in the fish.

All this involved an idea of, and I hesitate to say advancement, but an idea of change along certain lines. We have spoken of mental genes. These are more or less psychic blueprints for physical matter, and in these mental genes existed the pattern for your human type of self-consciousness. It did not appear constructed, that is in constructed form, for a long period of physical time however, and we have discussed psychological time as being part of what I will call for now an inner time sense.

This human self-consciousness existed in psychological time and in inner time long before you as a species constructed it in terms of your particular camouflage patterns. For your friend's sake I will simplify this, saying that human consciousness was inherent and latent from the beginning of your physical universe."

—TES1 Session 26 February 18, 1964

[Sena]

You know now that so-called inert form has consciousness. To some degree it even possesses self-consciousness, and so there is no point at which self-consciousness entered, so to speak, with the sound of trumpets. Consciousness, to a degree, was inherent in the first materialization physically upon your plane.

@inavalan  Bernardo Kastrup puts it a bit differently. According to him, consciousness is primary, and apparently inert matter is a manifestation of consciousness.

[inavalan]

@Sena I think that that's what Seth says too. The inert matter is formed of units of consciousness that are self-conscious (atoms, particle too). There is no "objective" physical-universe that exists independent of consciousness, neither inert matter, nor life. In the physical-reality, everybody and everything consciously experiences only the reality created by its subconscious, as it happens while dreaming too.

I'd say that consciousness isn't primary, but it is everything.

A tree is conscious of itself as a tree

https://speakingofseth.com/index.php/topic,2959.msg23703.html#msg23703


=======
EDIT: Non-physically only, everything is connected through the inner-senses.
I don't experience the people I meet, but my primary constructions of them, based on filtered telepathic connections; somewhat like from my computer now, localized constructions that only I experience.
There is no physical-reality out there that I observe. My subconscious makes it up based on the inner-senses' perceptions, filtered by beliefs and expectations.

[Sena]

I'd say that consciousness isn't primary, but it is everything.

@inavalan Yes. I think Kastrup also says that consciousness is everything. My previous statement was not quite correct.