A most basic and fundamental philosophical question concerns access: Do we, as the expression of an exclusive group of a general consciousness, have access to anything that is not consciousness?
The usual ways this question is answered most often rely upon a resounding “yes”. Then from this Omni present and fully evident axiom we run into the problem of which access is more correct, and then from the conundrum of this problem we end up with governing institutions the most recent and effective of which we call democracy.
But there are other ways that this yes is qualified, and these other ways tend to rely upon a more hidden yes, because they tend to say overtly that there is no access and then by the totality by which the access is denied, it goes on to then prove in a kind of obscure manner that consciousness is all there is, that because consciousness has no access to anything that is beyond consciousness, that the entirety of the universe must be consciousness. Then from this reduction of access, we come to the various justifications of how this may be the case; in particular, various sorts of illusions and various sorts of layering’s of reality to where, at one end, there is a bunch of fake aspects of knowledge or understanding that are not true or illusory, and then the other end that is a more true and substantial which is a sort of “spiritual” understanding of the essential an absolute nature of all things. The nature of this type of reduction is to say that there is no access except through this one fundamental primary essential portal.
Nevertheless we should understand that even this type of discursive slight of hand is another tentative and transitory stage. For this type of understanding is no different then to say that there is a heaven and a hell and this world is a testing ground of sorts where our spirit is tried, or where we gain knowledge of truth to various degrees around and through which consciousness, on the other hand ,can experience various and multitudinous incarnations.
Every form of understanding that seeks to escape the present experience is always thus a religious posture and really has no more credence for truth or even proof then any other except in as much as a certain condition of knowledgereveals various zones of reductions for significant emotional or non-emotional, as the case maybe, state-meanings.
Hence we are able to come to a description of what the human being does, over arguments that want to justify its position of being in that scheme of meaning as an absolute ‘beginning’.