Integral Practice

Big Mind and Indwelling God

ebuddha — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:33:57 -0800

Great post from Per at Mystery of Existence, on Big Mind and Indwelling God:

So where Big Mind is impersonal and everywhere, the indwelling God is personal and right here, in the heart space of the physical body. The experience of it, at least for me right now, is of a fragment of God for this particular individual soul and human self, and a fragment that includes and reflects the whole of God. It is not diminished in any way, yet also right here and for this particular individual.

Make sure to go read the whole post. I'd love to see Chris at Indistinct Union comment on this as well, as he has commented on other MOE posts - and this seems right up his alley.

Fun Buddhist Fact: Buddhist Don't Meditate

ebuddha — Thu, 11 Jan 2007 10:37:48 -0800

Read this Tricycle post to find out why.

Noticed this at Blogmandu.

Spiritual Intelligence (SQ) and Competencies to Define It

ebuddha — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:52:24 -0800

A very interesting post at Parzifal's Blog.

I think this has been linked to before, but what is interesting about this, is that this attempt to define what is spiritual intelligence, and what defines that, is backed up with research that has been compiled through various workshops.

The results utilize the framework of the quadrants, as well as the framework of competencies and assessments, and an attempt to separate out levels - or consolidate ALTITUDE. Very consonant with Integral Spirituality.

I also simply like the SQ distinction as well. As multiple intelligences go, why not an SQ? And the assessments which measure it?

Pongsathorn Experience of Dzogchen

ebuddha — Fri, 08 Dec 2006 12:02:28 -0800

An interesting report from Pongsathorn on meeting Dzogchen teachers.

Integral Cognition

ebuddha — Wed, 22 Nov 2006 11:51:04 -0800

A great post by David Jon here.

"Yet, I was still taken up with the promise of what a comprehensive philosophy would look like. It wasn't Ken Wilber's vision that held me in thrall anymore. It was the underlying nature of a comprehensive philosophy–i.e., a non-reductionistic philosophy–that I sensed as being the original basis for my resonance with Ken Wilber's work and what I might now choose to call 'Integral Cognition.'"

I would agree with this - and I find that those who attempt to embrace the highest forms of - Spirit, Mind, Body, Other, Soul, Skillful Means In Living - these are the people I want to be my "tribe" so to speak.

Grounded in the world.
In communion with the Divine Soul
Self aware, of one's own shadows and B.S.
Learning, giving, growing, creating - "He not busy being born is busy dying".
Relaxing into the Buddha's smile, that is perfect as it is.

Big Mind, 3-2-1: Shifting Perspectives, Hard Character Lines

ebuddha — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 13:39:15 -0800

I wonder about the efficacy of Big Mind, 3-2-1 - well, for me, specifically about Big Mind.

There is no doubt, that a perspective shift is engaged in, when Big Mind practice occurs. As always though, as for my other big realizations, it fades away.

Perhaps it is the nature of the beast - all realizations fade away - I shouldn't expect anything else, right?

What is so, is so. And - that means "me experienced as me", and "other experienced as other" as well.

I'm not sure, really. I've had enough peak experiences, enough time in silent awareness, in meditation, watching the universe quite literally "rise and fall", as one breath, in one moment - it still seems strange that I so easily revert to "me against the world", objectifying and identifying myself with - er - myself...

I'm sure there is something I am missing there, so I decided to kvetch on it...

Integral Practice Review - What Is Clear

ebuddha — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 14:08:22 -0800

I clearly haven't been posting a lot here - mainly because I've been pretty busy.

But also, this particular blog has focused on the "basics", of integralism (when not veering to tech stuff and philosophy!)

For various dimensions, it is now pretty clear what the basic practices are.

Physical - I've blogged before - but 2 to 3 times a week, cardio, stretching, and weighlifting for exercise.

For diet - barring special circumstances - less carbs, and balanced eating.

Meditation - while there is a lot around the map here, the basic practices involved for integral involve:

Basic Zen/Vipassana sitting
BigMind/Advaita training
Compassion/Heart work

Now, of course, I'm missing a lot of the I-Thou meditations. Perhaps I could blog them.

In terms of professional, career - one of the best books out there for this is Pathfinder, and What Color Is Your Parachute?

Both are passionate and practical, and give a very good sense of what are the gifts one has to GIVE, in terms of skills, abilities, and desires.

Psychological/interpersonal- while there are a lot of books out there, self-assessment is fairly easy to use, and I have also used this site to point to inexpensive therapeutic options. And then there is the Shadow Work of the 1-2-3, as well as Byron Katie's work. I could write more about relationship as well, but it is so easy for this to become narcissistic, in my opinion.

Now - community - this is probably one of the biggest lacks that I personally have, or have not written a lot about, and I've been attempting to address this through the Ken Wilber MeetUp, and organizing the San Francisco ILP Group.

And then, when you do all the above, do you have time for rest, play, and creativity? Where is the balance?

I still believe there are things that are important for an "integral practitioner" to deal with - deeper delving into the interpersonal, dealing with MOTIVATION and destructive subpersonalities (just because all the practices are out there, doesn't mean you are doing them!), and also re-introducing some concepts into the integral community with ethics - such as "duty", "community commitment" etc. A community is defined by the individuals that "take on" the duties of that community, and it is duty and volunteerism that is the glue of community. Which conflicts a bit with "my/your integral growth". And you want to keep away from any cultism, as such.

At any rate, opening up for questions - what integrally, needs to be worked on? My integral growth, rather than "our" integral growth?

Finer Details in Non-Dual

ebuddha — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:04:29 -0700

A good post from Per.

Also note, his blog has changed. He is blogging from absentofi.blogspot.com.

Song of the Mahamudra

ebuddha — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 17:30:13 -0700

This is from NDhighlights, but I think it is worth reprinting:

Song of the Mahamudra (Tilopa's Song to Naropa)

Mahamudra, the royal way, is free
from every word and sacred symbol.
For you alone, beloved Naropa,
this wonderful song springs forth from Tilopa
as spontaneous friendship that never ends.
The completely open nature
of all dimensions and events
is a rainbow always occurring
yet never grasped.
The way of Mahamudra
creates no closure.
No strenuous mental effort
can encounter this wide open way.
The effortless freedom of awareness
moves naturally along it.
As space is always freshly appearing
and never filled,
so the mind is without limits
and ever aware.
Gazing with sheer awareness
into sheer awareness,
habitual, abstract structures melt
into the fruitful springtime of Buddhahood.
White clouds that drift through blue sky,
changing shape constantly,
have no root, no foundation, no dwelling;
nor do changing patterns of thought
that float through the sky of mind.
When the formless expanse of awareness
comes clearly into view,
obsession with thought forms
ceases easily and naturally.
As within the openness of universal space
shapes and colors are spontaneously forming,
although space has no color or form,
so within the expanse of awareness
realms, relations and values are arising,
although awareness possesses
no positive or negative characteristics.
As the darkness of night,
even were it to last a thousand years,
could not conceal the rising sun,
so countless ages of conflict and suffering
cannot conceal the innate radiance of Mind.
Although philosophers explain
the transparent openness of appearances
as empty of permanent characteristics
and completely indeterminable,
this universal indeterminacy
can itself never be determined.
Although sages report
the nature of awareness to be luminosity,
this limitless radiance cannot be contained
within any language or sacramental system.
Although the very essence of Mind
is to be void of either subjects or objects,
it tenderly embraces all life within its womb.
To realize this inexpressible truth,
do not manipulate mind or body
but simply open into transparency
with relaxed, natural grace
intellect at ease in silence,
limbs at rest in stillness
like hollow bamboos.
Neither breathing in nor breathing out
with the breath of habitual thinking,
allow the mind to be at peace
in brilliant wakefulness.
This is the royal wealth of Mahamudra,
no common coin of any realm.
Beloved Naropa, this treasure of Buddhahood
belongs to you and to all beings.
Obsessive use of meditative disciplines
or perennial study of scripture and philosophy
will never bring forth this wonderful realization,
this truth which is natural to awareness,
because the mind that desperately desires
to reach another realm or level of experience
inadvertently ignores the basic light
that constitutes all experience.
The one who fabricates
any division in consciousness
betrays the friendship of Mahamudra.
Cease all activity that separates,
abandon even the desire to be free from desires
and allow the thinking process to rise and fall
smoothly as waves on a shoreless ocean.
The one who never dwells in abstraction
and whose only principle
is never to divide or separate
upholds the trust of Mahamudra.
The one who abandons craving
for authority and definition,
and never becomes one-sided
in argument or understanding,
alone perceives the authentic meaning
hidden in the ancient scriptures.
In the blissful embrace of Mahamudra,
negative viewpoints and their instincts
are burned without remainder, like camphor.
Through the open door of Mahamudra,
the deluded state of self-imprisonment
is easily left behind forever.
Mahamudra is the torch of supreme liberty
shining forth through all conscious beings.
Those beings constituted by awareness
who try to ignore, reject or grasp awareness
inflict sorrow and confusion upon themselves
like those who are insane.
To be awakened from this madness,
cultivate the gracious friendship
of a sublime sage of Mahamudra,
who may appear to the world as mad.
When the limited mind
enters blessed companionship
with limitless Mind,
indescribable freedom dawns.
Selfish or limited motivations
create the illusory sense of imprisonment
and scatter seeds of further delusion.
Even genuine religious teaching
can generate narrowness of vision.
Trust only the approach
that is utterly vast and profound.
The noble way of Mahamudra
never engages in the drama of
imprisonment and release.
The sage of Mahamudra
has absolutely no distractions,
because no war against distractions has ever been declared.
This nobility and gentleness alone,
this nonviolence of thought and action ,
is the traceless path of all Buddhas.
To walk this all-embracing way
is the bliss of Buddhahood.
Phenomena on every plane of being
are constantly arising and disappearing.
Thus they are forever fresh,
always new and inexhaustible.
Like dreams without solid substance,
they can never become rigid or binding.
The universe exists in a deep, elusive way
that can never be grasped or frozen.
Why feel obsessive desire or hatred for it,
thereby creating illusory bonds?
Renounce arbitrary, habitual views.
Go forth courageously to meditate
in the real mountain wilderness,
the wide open Mahamudra.
Transcend boundaries of kinship
by embracing all living beings
as one family of consciousness.
Remain without any compulsion
in the landscape of natural freedom:
spontaneous, generous, joyful.
When you receive the crown of Mahamudra,
all sense of rank or attainment
will quietly disappear.
Cut the root of the vine that chokes the tree,
and its clinging tendrils wither away entirely.
Sever the conventionally grasping mind,
and all bondage and desperation dissolve.

The illumination from an oil lamp
lights the room instantly,
even if it has been dark for aeons.
Mind is boundless radiance.
How can the slightest darkness
remain in the room of daily perception?
But one who clings to mental processes
cannot awaken to the radiance of Mind.
Strenuously seeking truth
by investigation and concentration,
one will never appreciate
the unthinkable simplicity and bliss
that abide at the core.
To uncover this fertile ground,
cut through the roots of complexity
with the sharp gaze of naked awareness,
remaining entirely at peace,
transparent and content.
You need not expend great effort
nor store up extensive spirtual power.
Remain in the flow of sheer awareness.
Mahamudra neither accepts nor rejects
any current of energy, internal or external.
Since the ground consciousness
is never born into any realm of being,
nothing can add to or subtract from it.
Nothing can obstruct or stain it.
When awareness rests here,
the appearance of division and conflict
disappears into original reality.
The twin emotions of anxiety and arrogance
vanish into the void from which they came.
Supreme knowing knows
no separate subject or object.
Supreme action acts resourcefully
without any array of instruments.
Supreme attainment attains the goal
without past, future or present.
The dedicated practitioner
experiences the spiritual way
as a turbulent mountain stream,
tumbling dangerously among boulders.
When maturity is reached,
the river flows smoothly and patiently
with the powerful sweep of the Ganges.
Emptying into the ocean of Mahamudra,
the water becomes ever-expanding light
that pours into great Clear Light
without direction, destination,
division, distinction or description.

Steve Pavlina, Subjective Reality, Non-duality, Integral

ebuddha — Thu, 18 May 2006 11:41:54 -0700

I don't know who might have read this post on Subjective Reality by Steve Pavlina.

It is an interesting mix between the non-dual perspective, and the New Age perspective - (I'm specifically thinking about Seth type of material.)

Certainly, the description of the subjective is pure advaita.

Simply read any of Ramesh Balsekar's works, and the similarity is quite apparent.

Or perhaps, this is closer to A Course In Miracles outlook.

Where the digression begins to occur, is the entry of what I would call "co-creation". Here is a section of Pavlina's Q&A:

Question: So if I were to believe in something that didn’t exist or that wasn’t possible yet, it would actually begin to manifest in the physical universe?

Answer: Yes, it would. The physical universe is a summation of thought. So first of all, in order to change this universe, you must adopt the belief that creation by thought is possible. You must not only believe it. You must know it.

If you try to create by thought, yet deep down you still believe it’s impossible or highly improbable, then it will not manifest for you. The physical universe, including time and space, can only manifest in a manner that is congruent with your beliefs.

So here now an INDIVIDUAL belief will begin to have an affect on the OUTER subjective world experienced. Beliefs are the mediating entity between the true subjective self and the normal objective self.

This is as opposed to the advaita view - that the experienced outer world - the normal world of form - is actually the subjective's dream - Brahma's dream - and not "your" dream. "Not MY will, but THINE." And implicit in this, is the surrender to God, the subjective, WHAT IS, rather than an attempt at manipulation through "belief changing".

But again, it isn't JUST that simple as that because - guess what? Each individual is blessed with a "creative self", and an ability to affect the world, at least on a social level.

So Pavlina's version of Subjective Reality for the "world" and how to affect that world, is a bit different from - say, the "two truths" doctrine.

Or, the more sophisticated version of the Two Truths doctrine promoted by Ken Wilber, that is Integral Theory.

I could say more on this, but I would like others feedback as well. Any thoughts? Post and trackback on your blogs and I'll link and discuss, or comment here, if you feel so inclined.

Integral Math? Continuing the conversation about perspectives

ebuddha — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:20:25 -0700

Pongsathorn has been delving deeply into the "academic" side of integral thought, in particular, drawing out some of the details of the Integral Spirituality draft, and, I assume, what will be present in the new Integral Spirituality book.

You need to spend time with this, translating the variables into perspectives - but I offer up the links, for those who are interested:

Integral Math and Order of Mind - Part I

Integral Math and Order of Mind - Part II

Complexity, Spirituality, Reinterpretation

(Quick cheat sheet - instead of the world resting on turtles all the way down, the world is perspectives - all the way down! Take that Bertrand Russell!)

As I pointed out a couple of days ago, "shifting perspectives" has quite an impact on how consciousness is experienced to the person - or p1 - 1st person perspective.

The important question is how deep this goes - and how to stay grounded, I suppose, and in the real world, as perspectives shift.

Also, I have the sinking feeling if I talk about this a lot, I'm going to start sounding very lawyerish - example:

"The party of the 1st part - er sorry - the perspective of the 1st person, would like to embrace the perspective of the 2nd person, without reference to the 3rd person's perspective.

However, this gets problematic when..."

More than simply an overview such as this, however, I still say what will radically push things forward, is for all practices, a disciplined intake, reporting, and assessment methodology. This will be delivered over web 2.0 at some point, and will radically transform the ascending nature of revelation - from the Bald's One's head, into a bottom-up, more egalitarian practical revelation of what works. It's just a matter of time.

Inner and Outer Integrations

ebuddha — Tue, 28 Mar 2006 15:08:07 -0800

Per has a good article on "inner and outer integrations".

Specifically regarding recognizing non-dual Self, Big Mind, etc - there are a variety of methods which shift a person's selfhood, and yet do so in different ways.

Jean waxes wise on the 321 process, and other thoughts on truly being "present" as Source

ebuddha — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:55:26 -0800

Go read here, but the key lines in my opinion:

One comment I have about the 321 process, however, is that in and of itself, it might only clear away minor emotional charges. I agree it's a great tool for identifying where projections might exist in relationships - and if you're lucky enough to be someone who's fairly clear and free flowing, then 321 might be all you'll ever need. But for deeply embedded or particularly snarled emotional stuff, some actual therapy and additional energy work is probably going to be required. The farther back in time an "emotional charge" is originating - in other words the farther back into your childhood or infancy a pathology goes - then the more difficult it will be to truly discharge that emotional energy and clear that block or snarl. Or you might find that you identify or clear a projection with one person, only to find the pattern repeating itself in other relationships, over and over again. It's like playing that damn gopher game at the carnival - you bash one, only to have another pop up right next to it.

The "mystery" of both our own personal emotional content and interactions, and then the emotional (and power) dynamics with others are worth commenting on, as this gets short shrift in integralism. I think you also must have been DOING emotional work for awhile - either in therapy, or as part of some group process - to truly be able to grok this level that Jean is speaking about. (deeply embedded or snarled emotional stuff).

For myself, I was in therapy for a few years - and then also had the following.

A long time ago now, I participated in a MUCH different community, and a much different emotional practice. I won't say too much about the community, because there were definite "cultish tendencies" happening, that I don't want to reward, even by mentioning - but there were some valuable lessons as well.

As far as the practice went, it was really "turning up the volume" on emotions, and giving it to God, praying with the emotional energy for clarity and for God to enter.

One of the revelatory aspects of that work, was FEELING - on a deep, existential level - just how much how I act, and everyone acts - is based on a constricted, egotistical self-justifying, emotional and defensive ego structure, rather than truly being PRESENT.

Basically, I - and we - act out of bure bullshit a hell of a lot more than I - and we - think.

Imagine this scenario -

Every time you act out of something other than "love" or "truth", or "wisdom" - and the same with others around you - you feel it, like a pain, or like a nails across a chalkboard.

When someone acts with a very constricted emotionality -
When I or someone justifies their position
When I or someone gossips,
when I or someone is mean,
when I or someone is defensive,
when I or someone is irrational,
when I or someone makes unnecessary conflict.

You feel it. Like a throbbing toothache, or a stab in the heart, I feel the consequences of being divorced from God, in how I defend, in every rude comment, in every lost soul on the street, in every snobbish intellectual commentary proclaiming union with source (as opposed to actual union with source)

That ability to feel separation from source, from being present - this was both a blessing and a curse (and in the end, more of a curse).

And the thing is - I would feel on a gut level that the daily actions and interactions from separation from source, quite outnumber the interaction from being one with source.

And yet, nothing can be done about it - I feel my own limitations to "act" in a more loving, true way, and definitely with others, I cannot do much, except to feel the separation. Although slowly, I would end up being more present.

As one can imagine, confrontation was sometimes utilized in this mode of interaction, and being made aware of acting from that which is not source - "acting from illusion", as the case is made.

This was sometimes painful and rewarding - as truth is rewarding, when the confrontation was focused on my own limitations/games.

And sometimes this was painful and not rewarding - when the confrontation was meant to prop up the cultish aspects of the organization.

This "emotional and existential separation from God" - that can be delved into and felt by anyone, and with it my own and other people's ACTS are also felt - as coming from separation or not, or some combiation of the two.

It's a powerful ability, but a bit of a hopeless one as well.

At any rate - the integral approach offers nothing I have seen to facilitate growth on this particular level. This level of emotional and gut truthfulness of being separate - acting out of fear, ego, greed, etc (seven deadly sins and more) or acting out of a deep, solid, loving, and strong, emotional open and flexible- "real" presence.

Are you LOVE or are you separate? Who and what do you SERVE? In this moment? And this moment?

On the other hand, experiences of oneness can happen on a level OUTSIDE the normal mode of mind/body emotional and will interactions. And focusing on the separation AT THE LEVEL of emotion and will - is this useful, or is this in itself, reinforcing the separate world??

At the end, I had to disconnect myself from the process - not only because of the cultish tendencies of the organization (I always kept a distance from the org), but also because the process ended up being too painful - the daily grind of feeling separation both in myself and around me, mellowed by the sense of emotional merging with the Divine that the practice encouraged.

And now, I have more peace. Less agony/ecstasy. Also, I am still "aware" of the B.S., of separation - but now I "see" it, rather than "feeling" it, on an ongoing basis.

And I don't know whether this is good or bad. During that time, I was more emotionally connected to others - and people felt this - but I was suffering a hell of a lot more. Now, I am less emotionally connected to others - but I am much happier and more at peace.

I've wandered far afield from Jean's original post.

But what is clear is - and this goes back to the issue of things that are emotionally and gut charged - there is very little in integralism itself which deals with the immediacy of FEELING the daily separation from source, and how to integrate this, on a gut and emotional level. There is a lot of "assuming the close" - we are already one with THAT SOURCE - which of course is also TRUE, at one level.

I'm not sure this core PERSONAL level - of being truly present or being separate - must be worked through to truly be FULLY realized.

But my gut feeling is, yes, this PERSONAL knot of separation must be untangled, or released.

Integral Inquiry - don't call it a comeback, I've been here for years

ebuddha — Sun, 12 Mar 2006 14:05:34 -0800

I've been enjoying going through the ILP Kit, and listening to the Dvd's.

One of the things I am pleased about, is the "Integral Inquiry" long form. This is your basic eastern meditation practice - and actually, is the variation that I adopted for "ease in a busy life", over 10 years ago.

the basic practice is a quick centering, and then breath counting - and then I use the same thing, in that the breath counting stops after awhile, and the breath is simply paid attention to.

So that is simply good to know. This basic practice in various traditions can get a lot of refinements, such as breathing in one notril, then the other. Breathing in energy, breathing it out, etc. But the basic practice of counting breaths and resting in awareness, is the ground.

For me, when this practice is very deep, therre is a subtle dissolving of the inner and outer awareness, into just awareness meeting what is arising - in and out.

This is a fundamentally different practice - and a different viewpoint - than say, Big Mind, or Advaita pointing out instructions. In that type of embracing the "view" - there is a fundamental shift of identity - somewhat separate from awareness arising. In this "seeing" is different, in that the identity shifts to this subtle quietly joyful identity, that arises moment by moment, breath by breath.

the two have not met, for me - which eventually is supposed to happen.

People like Brad Warner (assuming he is being honest and on the level) look at Big Mind, Advaita Vedanta, and says they are B.S. Just sit, until all the contents of consciousness are met, and the clarity of what is will shine through.

However, there is a profound awakening that happens through BigMind, Advaita Vedanta, Course in Miracles, Tibetan Buddhism, etc.

Because that understanding is so profound -and yet can also fall away (in my experience) - it's still an open question whether "the view" - which is open for anybody to shift into, and experience the profoundness of - is some type of final end.

Masculine, Feminine & Integral Practice

ebuddha — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 11:01:24 -0800

We've been having fun here over at Integral Practice (or maybe just me) with the notion of feminine and masculine. For example, Jean's comment made me chuckle mightily:

"Ebuddha! Boy, you're just hankering for a masculine/feminine slapdown aren't you? At least your comments on GenSit over the David Jon/Victoria dialogue, and now this would seem to indicate. At any rate, let me go put on my magic grrl power Docs, and let's see if we can sort this out.

Ok, for the freakin' record, I never said that ILP in and of itself is hypermasculine. I said the ILP Kit is hypermasculine, and to me there is a big difference."

Sorry about that Jean!

At any rate, the whole comment is worth reading - and for me, it brings up a couple of important points.

How to define what is masculine and feminine, as these energies interpenetrate each other, within each person. To a degree that I'm not sure how you can do things but have general percentages - "ITP is 80% masculine, in it's current form", "that statement is 50% ignorant of feminine realities", etc, etc.

Also, another point this brings up, in regards to the limitations of reality and messy egos, what they need to grow:

Let's say you are very good at structure, and at your "practices". You meditate every day, do your yoga twice a week, run 3 times a week, do a heart practice nightly, go to group awareness once every two weeks, hang out with your friends once a week, spend enough quality time with your significant other, as well as have your work, which you enjoy (and is on a strict 8 to 5 schedule as well.)

This regularity, and balance - it's a good life, a whole life, and a full life.

But does it lead to transformation? As Jean as pointed out, an "imbalance", an injustice - something UNcomfortable, out of one's "control", something challenging, this is as important for growth as a stable pursuit of excellence.

Let's say one has all of the above in terms of integral practice - aren't there aspects of life that are missing - say, are you really ever challenged about your personal egoic crap? If you are disciplined, it's really easy to hide a sense of smugness, superiority, rightness with a capital R, in a life like that, wouldn't you say?

I wonder what a nondual, integral "encounter group" would look like?

The stuff one learns about oneself in encounter groups, if you are simply falling into the non-dual consciousness, or responsibly going on with your practices - you may never bring sufficient attention to, and may easily learn to camouflage.

But to bring TOO much attention to these personal deficiencies - well, you are back to accepting the FALSE - as in belief in a separate, limited self - as REAL.

Thoughts on the above?

Also, I'm going to attempt to make the process of commenting here a bit easier in the next couple of months. I've had some feedback that it's a bit of a pain...

From the SELF blog Ramana Maharshi on Sri Aurobindo

ebuddha — Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:40:06 -0800

Here is the link - a very good conversation, that brings up a whole host of questions.

Wilber is, in a very real way, the current modern exemplar of an evolutionary spirituality that Aurobindo in the East, first proposed. As such, Wilber's Institute and work - like Aurobindo before him - tends towards a comprehensiveness and account of the world as it is in its form, as well as it is in it's formlessness, and towards a progress IN this world, and accounting for the various forms of this world.

Ramana Maharshi is having none of this:

"The state of Atmanishta [being fixed in the Self], devoid of the individual feeling of 'I', is the supreme state. In this state there is no room for thinking of objects, nor for this feeling of individual being. There is no doubt of any kind in this natural state of being-consciousness-bliss. So long as there is the perception of name and form in oneself, God will appear with form, but when the vision of the formless reality is achieved there will be no modifications of seer, seeing and seen. That vision is the nature of consciousness itself, non-dual and undivided. It is limitless, infinite and perfect"

Given the limited apperception - and availability to - the non-dual state - even reading Maharshi's description, elicits a change in perception for me. A wonder seizes me - that peaceful, joyful peace arises, not attached to any object.

But there is still a WORLD that I live in, that I work in, that I have relationships in. That impinges upon me.

Say there are 100,000 life lessons to learn, for your time here on earth. Navigating that absolute commitment to the formless- that Maharshi is a stand-in for - is only a small part of the lessons that life can teach you here on earth.

And then the other 95,000 lessons that life has for you, in terms of giving, receiving, communicating, learning, growing - these lessons are what the "integral", and "skillful means" concepts point to.

Walking that tightrope between the two, is my own personal task.

Cross-posted at Generation Sit

Vince Describes Breaking Down Vince

ebuddha — Wed, 16 Nov 2005 09:38:03 -0800

Vince has begun the reflection on his 6 week retreat, with his first installment.

Definitely go check it out!

Lifehack, Audio Books, and lack of time

ebuddha — Fri, 19 Aug 2005 11:48:47 -0700

I ran across this LifeHack article about audiobooks, and it resonated with me.

"I sleep for 6-7 hours, spend around 1 hour for lunch, dinner and bath, 8-10 hours for my work and 1 hour for commuting. Adding them up, I already spent 16-19 hours on those projects. By spending 2 hours per day for blogging and its preparation (reading, planning etc), time for attending my post-grad courses in human resources management, and time for my girl friend and family - That leaves me less than 3 hours per day to do the rest of things - including self-development."

It's a similar type of situation for me, in terms of lack of time - and then of course, you add an hour of meditation, and then an average of 30 minutes a day on some physical exercise (working out, yoga, running, etc).

Since my commute and my run are combined now (I'm commuting BY running home, for the most part), that helps.

Beginning of this year, I found a way to leverage some of the used time for self-development - by listening to audio books. With some tasks like commuting and bathroom break, I can utilize these times to listen and learn from the audio content

I've done something similar, in that I've put a few things on Audio -I have Eckhart Tolle on CD, and transferred it to the Ipod, and then a few INaked presentations and conversations as well.

The Eckhart Tolle, and some Poonjaji stuff, is very good, for example, on a bus (if I'm late, don't want to walk). There's something about moving, without being responsible for your own locomotion, that resonates deeply in terms of a proper understanding of will to Divine Will. (Maybe this is just me).

Has anyone out there had a lot of positive experiences with books on tape/CD/Ipod? What works, what doesn't, in your experience? In knowledge, understanding, behavior change, and simple entertainment?

The Inner-Net

ebuddha — Wed, 17 Aug 2005 10:43:48 -0700

If you haven't had a chance to view this site, please go take a look.

The Inner-Net.

The Inner-Net is a fascinating site, that is about a former brilliant Sun Microsystems employee (and PhD), who along with his wife, has taken a year out to basically walk across India, visiting every ashram and spiritual place he can find along the way (in the current entry, he has just come out of a ten day retreat).

The ongoing story is fascinating, and inspiring. As an example, for all of my enthusiasm and "tech" skills (such as they are), this gentleman simply is the best of the best in regards to technical skills.

But he has given it all up (at least for now), simply walking, living on nearly nothing, travelling across India, meditating for various retreats, and documenting his travels, the meditations, and the people they meet.

It's an inspiring story. I suggest reading this blog, when you can.

Back from I-Wet

ebuddha — Mon, 01 Aug 2005 09:26:05 -0700

I was actually sick on the Thursday and Friday before the weekend - so I wasn't sure how I would be during the Integral training weekend.

I did end up being pretty tired - but the experiences were pretty cool. I'll say more later today or tomorrow, but I have a lot of work in the office to catch up on now.

Am I out of time for "enlightenment"?

ebuddha — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 14:17:55 -0700

According to this article. maybe so.

Propositional knowledge and Integral Methodological Pluralism

ebuddha — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 10:46:33 -0700

Is propositional knowledge a necessary and sufficient mode of knowing truth, or does Integral Methodological Pluralism add necessary components?

Are these two modes of knowledge gathering:

The same with different names?
Different but complementary?
Different and opposed?

Inquiring minds both want to know -and don't want to know.

Liveblogging Ken Wilber and Andrew Cohen

ebuddha — Tue, 19 Apr 2005 00:15:37 -0700

In an earlier post, I said I would give an analysis of the recent Integral Naked dialogue between Ken Wilber and Andrew Cohen. As an experiment, Ive decided to do a form of liveblogging. I remember this first being done during the presidential debates and I have decided to use this format, for commenting on this dialogue. NOTE: This isnt really liveblogging since Im not that fast a typer (or thinker). This is more listening, stopping when something is interesting, and then even playing the interesting segment back again, to make sure I get it correctly. My commentary will be in italics. At the end, will be my analysis. At any rate, with that introduction, lets go:

Ken Wilber and Andrew Cohen tap-dancing around the elephant in the room

ebuddha — Mon, 18 Apr 2005 10:11:38 -0700

I've just listened to the most recent "what's new" dialogue up at Integral Naked.

I'll post a real analysis tonight, but I wanted to mention that, it's worthwhile listening to it. (Let me know if I should post the MP3 file to OurMedia, and provide the link, for anyone who isn't a subscriber to Integral Naked. Or simply email me, that way it stays private.)

It's worth listening to.

Again, more later, but 1st thoughts.

1. Cognitively, most of the points being talked about are clear - a person's "center of gravity" doesn't shift, even if one understands the spiritual vision intellectually. To move the center of gravity up takes work, and at times will involve confrontation.
2. Ken is very, very nicely nicely, almost excruciatingly nicely, hinting around some of the controversy surrounding Andrew Cohen. It's a public forum, and so I understand the feather touch - it makes sense.
3. Emotionally, Cohen sounds incredibly defensive, using valid points about spiritual authority and spiritual growth, but the emotional defensiveness seems is there.. There is no doubting this.
4. Andrew Cohen is a "Right Man", in terms of always believing, he, or his vision, is right. I'll attempt to find the link to a pathological description of "Right Man" later. There's a very good description of this is some work of psychology, but it has slipped my mind at the moment.

Being "Right" with a capital R, and being a "Rude Boy" to boot, is very problematic, in my view.

NOTE: Cross-posted at Integral Naked Forum

Naked Reflection on Integral Spritual Practice

ebuddha — Tue, 01 Mar 2005 00:11:08 -0800

For at least a month I've wanted to comment on this article.

The gentleman at Naked Reflections is quite bright and sensitive, his claim of "uncommonly unaccomplished" notwithstanding.

But he brings up a few points on spiritual practice that I've heard elsewhere.

1. Laziness
2. Lack confidence that practice will lead to results.
3. Spiritual mastery isn't all it is cracked up to be.

This ends up being more of an introduction, that leads to a positive dispostion of entertaining and integral practice, and then contemplating the right framework for him.

But there seems to me to be a couple of points of misunderstanding in the article, that I'd like to share my opinion on (yes, I know, I like to share my opinion...)

a. The concept of mastery, and the idea of "final destination".
b. A related point - the journey and the goal.

Here's the relevant quote -

"The first is sheer laziness. It’s distressingly difficult for me to get up off my literal and figurative butt and work hard at anything. And genuine spiritual practice is nothing if not hard work. Second, I lack confidence that even the most diligent practice could yield tangibly positive results in my case. This is because I tend to see true mastery of spiritual discipline, like mastery of most other disciplines except even more so, as requiring tremendous raw talent. Exhaustive, skillful practice might be necessary to cultivate that
talent into the radiant flower of spiritual realization, but without the fertile seed and soil of exceptional talent, no amount or quality of cultivation will produce a flower. It’s a huge stretch for me to see myself as talented with the potential for anything approaching spiritual mastery. After all, how many devotees of any spiritual path become enlightened no matter how long, hard, and skillfully they work at it?"

I think it is fundamentally, absolutely important, that the focus isn't on a "goal", but is on the journey. I can remember, way back when now, my first week of meditation. Even the first week of meditation, I experienced a bit of calming, a bit of peace, a slight bit more clarity (or I convinced myself I did!)

If you are a "normal" person, as nagarjuna claims to be (and as I am), then you have average motivation. I'm not going to be winning a swimming event in the Olympics, or jogging a 26 mile marathon, or becoming a grand weightlifter, any time soon.

And yet, I swim, I jog, and I lift weights.

Do I have a goal? Sort of - to stay healthy. But really, the secret goal is to get my endorphins flowing. I exercise because it feels good. It's a positive addiction.

For me, I found the secret, to make exercise good, most of the time. I approach my "edge", where I'm breathing hard, or working hard, but I never blow through to where I'm exhausted. (I used to push myself as hard as I could. That was when I stopped exercising!)

For me, meditation is the same way. The "bennies", on the path, are numerous.

I'll be walking along, the day after a meditation, and my mind disappears in the clouds, and only awareness is present.

I'll be walking through the park, seeing children play, and I'll be seized by a glorious love, close to weeping, my heart melting.

I can sit in a room, with the candles on, and simply be overtaken and entranced with awe, at the candles dancing (again the mind leaves)

Etcetera.

These are the positive things, the light on the way. There are, of course, shadows at play as well. Boredom that comes up in meditation. Deep, intolerant sensitivity. Emotional issues - deep grief, envy, etc. Incredible physcial discomfort. These will all arise.

But these negatives are the "slow burn" of the meditative process, as the psychic processes run through. Just like the "burn" of working out, I attempt to be at the edge of the shadow, without it overwhelming me.

And the postives, the good things, outweigh the negatives. So the practice, the journey, is worth it.

Follow up on last post

ebuddha — Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:16:36 -0800

Been busy - but a follow-up on the last post re: Stuart Davis article.

It's funny - I know so much about Indian advaita, and various yoga practices. I know quite a lot about Western synchronistic magic and meditation. I am fairly experienced in Christian ecstatic mysticism. And I am familiar with Tibetan Buddhism, as well as have gone on Vipassana retreats.

But my knowledge of the Zen tradition is limited.

However, Stuart's description of being in witnessing awareness, while waking and sleeping, and deeper, describes to a tee where I go in meditation, and have gone, at various times in life.

When I spent six months in India, devoted to meditation, beaches and hiking in the Himalayas (in that order) I reached a point where two things were happening in my consciousness.

1. The "witnessing" awareness was fairly constant, in waking, and was also in and out in sleeping.
2. At the end of the trip, (last month or so, after trekking in the Himalayas), a conscious recognition of non-duality was always present, and arising. This also lasted into sleep.

It was quite jarring to have, especially, point 2 above, fall away, after a couple of months back in the U.S. As well, point 1, as I got busy with the western life, experiencing the "crystalline" nature of awareness, for lack of a better word, comes in moments, rather than for hours and days.

(Then I got into emotional ecstatic mysticism, which was probably a huge mistake, as in these practices you can throw the witness out the window, but I'm not going to go into that now...was useful in terms of a very mind-y person's (me!) emotional growth, but very different that the "empty" awareness state. A profoundly different transpersonal state.)

At any rate, there was quite the resonance for me, of the description of witnessing in the waking and dream state. I know I've heard it before, but I have related my experiences, to a different, Indian model.

So for me, was an "aha - that's me!" moment.

That's it!

A very, very, very good post - must read

ebuddha — Thu, 24 Feb 2005 14:55:53 -0800

In a section of today's post (Go down to "Poor Man's Constant Consciousness?) Stuart Davis weighs in with one of the best spiritual blog posts I have yet seen. Really, it's awesome.

I'll say more about this later - namely, how it correlates with my own experience.

But for now, just go check it out.

Blogs, Spiritual Authority and the End of Secrets

ebuddha — Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:35:50 -0800

Stuart Davis had a quick post,on WhatEnlightenment without commentary, today.

I had thought of posting on this, but hadn't gotten around to it - or was pretty reluctant, for a variety of reasons, the main one being that a "bad" spiritual authority/student relationship breakup, resembles nothing more than the worst sort of divorces - with all the deepest emotional layers of betrayal, abuse, accusations, etc, exposed.

You can get a fuller sense of the controversy either at What Enlightenment? or at a couple of excellent forums on the controversy at Integral Naked. I highly recommend, if you have any interest in this topic, to read through these threads.

There are a couple of thoughts that occur to me, that I haven't seen brought up at the above places. So, I'll make these thoughts explicit here.

1. Like it or not, this is one of the things that blogs excel at - the takedown (justified or not, make your own decision). From Dan Rather, to Trent Lott, etc, every sets of eyes, ears, feelings, can now be a potential and enduring broadcaster to any of the teeming millions on the internet who wish to read, and listen.

These type of controversies, and any teacher abuses (and probably some false claims) will get aired far, wide, and efficiently.

Expect more of this, in the future - like anything, this ability will be used for good and bad.

2. Changing nature of expertise - where goes the hidden knowledge?

I'm not sure that there is, or can be an "open source spirituality" (should I register this domain?), but it is important to remember that the essential claim of spiritual knowledge, is that the holder of such knowedge HAS it - and by definition the seeker doesn't.

This "knowledge gap", or perhaps "being gap", depending - will get more and more separated from the corresponding "power gap" that traditionally is associated with the knowledge gap. This is, simply, inevitable. (This may not be a universally good thing. One aspect of surrendering to universal truth, from a place deep in the gut, is to COMPLETELY SURRENDER. Without challenge by an other, this is very difficult.) The point is that the tension between modern power relationships and differently defined spiritual power relationships will be exposed. This exposure will be by the people IN their spiritual communities, who feel this tension in themselves, and their relationship to the power structures in their spiritual community.

4. The nature of profound awakenings, and a note of caution.

Profound awakenings are, really, overwhelming to the ego. From my own experience, there is a sense of KNOWING what is so - and you can see it, like seeing the red of an apple in your hand. It is OBVIOUS.

If the revelation you are seeing is at odds with "what is expected" in society, so what? You see the truth. Your vision is clear. You are "doing the right thing".

While I've heard stories of Andrew Cohen over the years, I've never met the man. But even given the stories on What Enlightenment and other places, I don't get a sense that he isn't being true to his vision. But how does a person "temper" in some sense, the spiritual visions that fill him, and what those visions ask one to do?

It would be useful to have some type of epistemology for REVEALED TRUTHS, but of course, there isn't. There are individuals, attempting to put the truths they know and see, into practice. Heroically, even. Even if the world doesn't understand, and they hurt other people in the process.

Hierarchy, Expertise, Awareness, Open Source, Blogging

ebuddha — Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:55:58 -0800

I've been thinking quite a lot of the technological world and emerging interrelated networks, and how this applies in a power and political sense to spiritual communities, and more importantly to integral communities. The last ten years, with the rise of Linux, the term "open source" has become known. This is the idea that written software that is open and viewable by all, is able to be easily fixed and improved upon by any person who has the requisite desire, skill, and persistence. In this case, all knowledge is in a sense, "shallow" - open to all who invest the time and energy. I've alway thought that the term "open source" is (or should be) a beautiful term for spiritual knowledge. For example, the bookstore in Marin is called "Open Secret" - alluding to the fact that the supposed "secret" of enlightenment is open to all. There are many other examples of this, of course... The other trend in technology (well, at least it used to be a trend - this is in debate now, given the tech crash of 2000, and the resulting consolidation) is that in modern work is that there is a lot of "flattening" in the decision making process - i.e. that there is less and less of a hierarchical overlay, top down structure, but more and more, functionally independent and overlapping ciricles of execution that get things done without a large "guiding hand", so to speak. You can see this in the statistics of more and more independent contractors, people working from their homes, etc. What does this have to do with spirituality, politics, etc?