First and foremost, I cannot find words to express my gratitude for the sheer intensity and quality of the intellectual (and experiential) odyssey that your trilogy has put me though in the last 1 month since I got to know of it.
It seems to me that the fundamental objective must be a much bigger 'project' of helping transform global consciousness for the better , at a time when the world is precipitously careening off balance!
If that assumption is right, I thought about sharing some preliminary design principles for the 'global consciousness institution' if we can call it that. (I am wary of any institution in a PMR sense because of inherent dysfunctionalities of institutional ego and such, but i mean it more as a metaphor for a larger global program)
4 interesting questions which deserve some thought
a) How will the Consciousness Institution look in terms of manifestation (university, book series, curriculum, physical/ digital classroom or dissemination process, certification)
b) Who will be the faculty? (Many names come to mind - but I think a coherent, single orchestration engine is required than the new age movements of today which seem to dispersed and unwittingly subject to limitations of scale and scope)
c) When is the right timing for such an institution be conceptualized, constructed and rolled out across 6 billion people? ((is there a need for a conventional 'burning platform' (as if we do not already have one)or can it be invoked from a purely evolutionary need))
d) What is the right 'Management Infrastructure' required to build and run this global institution? And specifically, given the nature of the subject, what would be the right capital architecture for this institution?
In terms of fundamental design principles for this, I see 2 goal related aspects that need to be addressed:
1) Width related - how many people are affected, who are the people affected, and what is the multiplier effect for onward transmission
2) Depth related - how fundamentally and rapidly does the consciousness transformation process begin and continue, and how is its effectiveness measured (if there is a need to measure anything, in the first place)
Width is an aggregate centric parameter. The key width factors are:
1a) High impact recipients: Take the 100 most influential people in the world today and encourage spiritual awakening (for example), and their span of impact will affect many people positively as beneficiaries of that change process in material terms
1b) Train the Trainer: Every recipient not only embarks on the liberation process himself/ herself, but has the ability to coach others in their domain of impact. Thus onward transmission becomes an engineered process, and affect many more people positively as beneficiaries of that change process in spiritual terms
1c) Multi-segment contextualization: This is about nuancing the change intervention to become acceptable and effective in various recipient segments - social, cultural, economic.
Depth is a individual centric parameter. The key depth factors are:
2a) Mass customization: While the change process is 'industrialized' to achieve scale, it needs fine-tuning to meet the intimate, specific needs of a single recipient. This is thus the width related factor 1(c) being orthogonally serviced to the 'market of one', utterly and thoroughly
2b) Integral approach: The change process must be comprehensive- mind, body, shadow and spirit, so that there are no imbalances
2c) Self sustaining evolution: Tracking every evolutionary trajectory to create, nourish and accelerate the individual journey beyond the 'escape velocity' threshold after which it will automatically move on to achieve its highest purpose, on its own.
I have been on a restless, and as of now inconclusive quest to put a tight and implementable formulation to the 'consciousness institution'.
Your trilogy is very powerful raw material for that institution, if the right dissemination process can be engineered.
I welcome your thoughts on this.