Integral Theory

I've been following this for some time. It claims to be an inclusive methodology which practices uniting all underlying themes from premodern, modern and post modern thought. It attempts to find common ground, and deeper, underlying patterns in various schools of thought, taking what is useful (Not for a bias, but the pros of a particular theory) and rejecting what is self-limiting about a theory. In short, it claims to be a practice of awareness, expanding our knowledge to dynamic capacities; to be able to accept the rational mind of modernity while realizing its limitation, the postmodern mind of relativism without going to extremes, and then much more.

To be honest, for once, this seems possible! If you've read any of Ken Wilber's work? Anyone? Well, it's quite fascinating and a wonderful introduction. But there are of course many other writers. I'm wondering what anyone thinks of this? We live in a time where everything is relative, where information is in surplus, but action in deficiency. It's like an overload of data, and nobody seems to know what to do, or if there's even anything to do. I think it's important for hippies to read things over and take the next step. We've overthrown the black and white in favor of colors and pluralism. But what's next? Let's starting painting! Use those colors together, even a little black and white, and some shades of gray.

Anyhow, what do ya'll think?

 

I was surprised by your question, b/c I just got the audiobook of Weber's "Marriage of Sense and Soul"! I'm only on the second chapter, so I'll have to make an educated answer tomorrow... lol. I do like the idea of reconciling science and the spiritual, without dilluting either.

 

Great It's very interesting yes. I haven't read that book. How is it so far? In Wilber's other works he discusses how religion can be approached scientifically, that is, not just empirically but inquisitively, trial and error. For instance, Buddhism proposes a path or method, and you go ahead and test it yourself. Does it work? What does it do? Are there better ways? There is no blind faith, but an inquisitive mind, and, dare we say spirit. The methods science uses to verify data in the external world can be applied in our internal world; is that the jist of it?

 

If your interested in integral consciousness my advice is check out the work of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother.


Some stuff here: http://www.miraura.org/

 

Yes, that is what I understand so far. At the risk of botching what he says, I think that he is proposing a balance between modernity (demanding of evidence) and theoreticism (that claims everything is a free-floating interpretation).

 

Thanks I'll check it out. I noticed Weber does quote Sri Aurobindo favorably in his book.

 

Thanks for the link Bill. Aurobindo is mentioned quite frequently in Wilber's books. Others mentioned quite often, hmmm, maybe Jean Gebser, Jurgen Habermas. The Spiral Dynamics graph. Alot of vertical thinking is involved in alot of these fellas, developmental. Like the Heirarchy of Needs by Maslow. Anyhow, glad to see that there are others round these parts that have discovered some integral stuff

What do you think we, as individuals, can do at this point? And as a related side note, anyone read perennial philosophy?

 

Wilbur was formerly a follower of Adi Da, also known as Da Free John. Evidently, this genmtleman has his own ideas about Indian teachers, and puts Aurobindo on a lower level than himself. A comparison of the writings of the two would probably convince most people that in this, he was way wrong.


Personally, I have studied Aurobindo and the Mother's work, and I have some reservations and doubts about it. It is however, very interesting, if a bit inaccessible, and dare I say it, over the heads of many.

It seems there are various ideas around regarding the possible future of the human race:

- we destroy ourselves in one way or another

- we move into other dimensions, as per 'the celestine prophecy' and other similar ideas.

- we evolve into something far superior to what we are now - this is Sri Aurobindo's line.

- we get it together and migrate into space - leary, wilson etc.

Myself I prefer the space migration idea. I don't think humans have yet achieved thier potential and I don't think we'll see a new speices evolving until we do so.

As individuals I think all we can do is try for self-development by whatever methods we can find.

 

"the eye of spirit." i enjoyed that it was sort of science the whole way until the last chapter, where, having possibly captured a sceptic or two, he launched into "always already," one of the finest descriptions of immediate and effortless awareness i have read...it is after all a tricky thing to write about, being beyond words or even thought, which is dualistic and therefore unable to comprehend oneness.

 

Wilber throws that in alot in his books, and no surprise. Studied with, and received a "transmission", or direct, one-to-one teaching with Kalu Rinpoche, who taught Dzogchen Buddhism. It's exactly that. Immediate, effortless already-ness. The teacher just keeps pointing out your original nature as naturally and effectively as he can. Dzogchen isn't accessible as easily as other forms of buddhism, ironically, but it's out there. One good introductory book is Lama Surya Das' "Natural Radiance."

Wilber's also been influenced, aside from Aurobindo (and Da Free John), was Swi Ramana Maharshi. Another fellow who quite often used the "Who am I?" technique.

If you're interested in exploring the dualism of thought, check out Alan Watts. Any work by him is excellent. Jiddu Krishnamurti had alot to say about this as well.

 

According to Aurobindo's ideas about the integral consciousness, it would involve the capacity to see both unity and diversity simultaneously.

Generally, Sri Aurobindo thought that traditional paths are very limited in scope, and the result they aim for is not the same as his own integral yoga.
Both trad Hinduism and Buddhism tend to be world rejecting philosophies. They say in their most extreme menifestations that the world is unreal - an illusion which has to be surpassed or got out of, into a state of nirvana or moksha.

Sri Aurobindo and the Mother thought differently. Their integral yoga aims at transformation of the world, rather than a kind of escape from it into a trascendent unity. The universe is seen as the expression of the divine will and consciousness, rather than an illusion or even a mistake.

I sometimes winder if Wilbur truly understands Aurobindo's work.

 

i have read their work and found it helpful. the finest information i have experienced on advaita is contained in the open secret "by" tony parsons. krishnamurti had always been a bit krishnamurky for me until then, but after seeing it, everything i had ever encountered, including dzogchen, just settled into place.

having read several of your posts throughout the forum, i would be fascinated to hear your reaction to it. www.theopensecret.com , particularly the essays entitled 'the dream of separation' and 'seeing and not seeing.'
and for anyone else reading this - have a look. its a beautiful thing.

 

Oh my goodness, I just finished "Marriage of Sense and Soul" and I feel like I peeked into the mind of a genius! Wilber's philosophy is beautiful and I appreciate his systematic approach. I am totally inadequate to summarize the book, so I'll just mention a few things that I found interesting.

First he explains the "Big Three" spheres of value in Epistomological Pluralism:
1. The Eye of Flesh - empirical science
2. The Eye of Mind - rational knowledge
3. The Eye of Contemplation - spiritual knowledge
With Enlightenment came the differentiation of the three, the "Dignity of Modernity". The Dignity is made up of the ideas of equality, freedom, justice, etc. The part we want to keep. Then the dissociation of the three happened when empirical science began to take over the other two spheres, the "Disaster of Modernity". The disaster is that science insisted on looking at everything monologically and society began to lose its depth and meaning.

Then we take a look at the different Postmodern rebellions that have sprung up to find meaning. Romanticism, Idealism, Postmodernism, and Integralism. Each of these rebellions held philisophic truths that we want to keep, and had their own limitations as well.

He also made a beautiful grid of four quadrants, a tool to understanding reality. It is a graph of holons, things which are a whole within themselves and simultaneously a part of the larger Kosmos. I am not doing it justice here, but its amazing. I want to read some more of his work, it is definitely worth careful consideration.

 

Tony Parsons, interesting dude! I haven't finished reading it yet, but I have been looking at the bulk of "The Dream of Separation," and very much enjoy his style of 'teaching', so to speak. And, yes, sure enough, it re-affirms in its own unique way the 'teaching' of others; Krishnamurti, Wilber, Dzogchen, Tao. It's fascinating how it keeps re-appearing, and every time you hear it its like hearing it for the first time. Sometimes I think that what may click for one person will not click for another. There are many ways to say something, and it's great when it finally clicks. Could that be considered a koan in itself? I guess that's not important.

I haven't reached the details of this "open secret" (Another good synonym it seems to "natural radiance," "emaho" in dzogchen, "Mu!" in Zen, etc). It's utterly obvious and yet totally withdrawn from the action of thought, duality, etc. He spells it out wonderfully so far, catches everything 'it' isn't and spells it out directly. I'll keep you posted on further reading

 

One Taste is good. Integral Spirituality and the new book Integral Vision is finally out. There's another trilogy coming out later this year or next year, called "Integral Politics" (I think). For a fictional novel containing a bulk of the philosophy, "Boomeritis" is good. He's also go a nice book that's less integral methods and more spirituality, "The Simple Feeling of Being."

 

Thanks! I just got "Boomeritis" today at the library and ordered "The Fabric of the Future" from Alibris. I like the way he logically presents things, so many books I have got on Philisophy/Spirituality, seem like they are talking in circles and lacking much substance.

 

you are the details of this open secret - that's how beautiful it is. no reaching is necessary... your true nature is ever-present, always already clear, simple, effortless, perfect. only the idea that there is something more, something we have to achieve, by practise, or solitude, or dance or sex or only listening to vegetarian music (as parsons puts it!).

there is only oneness, and all those things, including the idea of The Search, arise in oneness, are oneness manifesting as those ideas, and they are all perfect as they are. only the mind judges them as good or bad, depending on how they sit with the comfort zone!

you are arising in oneness as the idea of shaman sun, as i am arising as the idea of denise-louise, or elayne as elayne...its just oneness playing. all that happens in "enlightenment" is that the idea of there being an individual is dropped, and then all there is is seeing. oneness seeing. oneness being. and then there is laughter.

the mind tries to pick all this info apart or understand it, and can't. the mind is a tool arising in wholeness, like a wave arising in the ocean. it seems to be separate, but it is just a form within the ocean, made of it, moving within it. there appear to be other waves around, some are big, some small, etc, but its all one ocean.

anyway enough said, i am glad you connected with the info - i had a feeling you would. and as a zen master once said - "now that you have seen your true nature, how about a nice cup of tea?"

 

Sure! I can bring the honey.

This practice of "the open secret" Wonderful! And I've read something like this in Wilber's "No Boundary" and in various other places. Dzogchen emphasizes that point as well. that there is nothing other than 'what is', immediately and presently arising. That's where life is, that being instantaneous. Bam. "Emaho!"

 

-- --

 

Grrr... I stink at meditation indoors! My "thinker" will not shut the hell up. I can do it outdoors fairly well, I don't understand. Do you have any trouble with this?