The Eye of Spirit:
Contemplative Experience and Integral
Science
Thomas Maxwell,
There is a growing understanding that addressing the global environmental
crisis facing humanity will require new methods for knowing, understanding, and
valuing the natural world. Narrow,
disciplinary, mechanistic, and reductionist perceptions of biological reality
are proving inadequate for addressing the complex, interconnected problems of
the current age. The currently dominant
worldview of scientific materialism, which views nature as a vast machine
composed of independent, externally related pieces, promotes fragmentation in
our thinking and perception (Capra, 1982). The materialist view of natural
systems as commodities to be exploited coupled with the ethos of consumerism
and social Darwinism has encouraged widespread destruction of our natural life
support systems (Drucker, 1994). The
cancerous spread of nihilism and dehumanization are driving the decay and
disintegration of techno-industrial culture (Sorokin, 1941, Sherrard, 1987).
There is considerable evidence that the current age of
materialist culture is ending as a new structure of consciousness emerges,
giving birth to the next stage of cultural evolution. This nascent integral consciousness
structure is grounded in the perception of higher levels of significance,
transcending the illusion of separateness to discern the unity which underlies
the diverse forms of existence. Although
these higher levels of significance can be elaborated through science, their
principal grounding is in contemplative experience.
Introspective examination of human consciousness reveals a
spectrum of subtle levels ranging from the most gross/ordinary to the most
subtle/contemplative, which are delineated rather precisely on the basis of
actual experience. The subtle levels of
consciousness, occasionally experienced spontaneously and developed through a
sustained and dedicated meditation practice, provide insight into facets of
reality which are inaccessible to the measuring apparatus of science, revealing
levels of significance that are hidden from ordinary scientific
interpretation. Subtle sapiential
experience, which Einstein calls the "sower of all true art and
science", reveals a numenous
presence in which we "live and move and have our being"- described by
Heisenberg and Plotinus as the "translucent splendor of the eternal One
shining through the material phenomena".
Amazing
discoveries in the realm of quantum physics have led many scientists to
conclude that traditional science is studying only "waves on the ocean of
reality", and that consciousness may be a more fundamental attribute of
this reality then space-time or matter. Extending
the empirical method to include the full spectrum of consciousness allows for
consensual validation of truth claims based on sapiential knowledge, supporting
an integrated epistemology that embraces both the rational knowledge of
scientific empiricism and the inner knowledge of contemplative experience. On this basis we envision a nested holarchy
of "integral sciences" ranging from the most rigorous and
reductionist at the lowest level of significance (traditional natural science)
to the most unitive at the highest level of significance. This approach answers Wolfgang Pauli's call
for a "synthesis embracing both rational understanding and the mystical
experience of unity" while providing a remedy for the spiritual
impoverishment of scientific materialism.
The fundamental sacredness and profound meaningfulness in all life is
realized, giving rise to a more integrative, holistic, and ecological perception of the cosmos.
The base data of biology can be interpreted at multiple
levels of significance. All levels of
significance are equally logical, factual, and objective- there is no way to
prove the existence of higher levels from lower levels. “Facts do not carry labels indicating the
appropriate level at which they ought to be considered. Nor does the choice of an inadequate level
lead the intelligence into factual error or logical contradiction”. (Schumacher 1977 p. 42).
However, confining truth to "the minimum of knowledge" -to the
lowest levels of significance- yields an impoverished view of reality.
Consider Tyrrell’s (1930) classic example of the levels of
significance of a book. To an animal the
book is simply an oddly shaped colored shape.
A tribal person may regard it as a series of marks on paper. A Western child may recognize it as a book,
while an adult may view it as a textbook that contains incomprehensible
equations and ridiculous claims about reality.
To a physicist it may be a profound treatise on quantum physics.
All the observers are partly correct in their understanding
of the book, but each is unaware of the higher levels of significance that they
are missing (Walsh 1993, p. 225). Their
understanding is not wrong, only the book can
mean more. Two hundred years from now a
future physicist may pick up the book and recognize levels of significance that
were unrecognizable by the contemporary scientist. To the untrained adult, the book seems
incomprehensible and even ridiculous.
E.F. Schumacher (1977, p. 42) describes a hierarchic
structure of instruments or faculties by which the human being perceives and
gains knowledge of the world. Perceiving
the higher levels or grades of significance requires the higher faculties: “if we do not have the requisite organ or
instrument, or fail to use it, we are not adequate to this particular part or
facet of the world with the result, as far as we are concerned, it simply does
not exist.” Our instruments of
perception must be adequate to the level of significance of the realm of study:
“all levels of significance up to the adequate level are equally factual, equally
logical, equally objective, but not equally real. When the level of the knower is not adequate
to the level (or the grade of significance) of the object of knowledge, the
result is not factual error but something much more serious: an inadequate and
impoverished view of reality" (p. 42).
Revisiting the earlier analogy, suppose the book falls into
the hands of intelligent aliens, who are unfamiliar with writing but are
accustomed to dealing with the external relationships of objects. They attempt to understand the nature of the
book by analyzing the statistical patterns of letters in the book, and believe
that they have fully understood the book when they have formulated equations
describing these patterns. “That each
word and each sentence expresses a meaning will never dawn on them because
their background of thought is made up of concepts which deal only with
external relationships, and explanation to them means
solving the puzzle of these external relationships… Their methods will never reach the grade [of
significance] which contains the idea of meanings”. (Tyrrell 1930)
The currently dominant worldview of scientific materialism,
which views nature as a vast machine composed of independent, externally
related pieces, yields an impoverished view of reality which is limited to the
lowest levels of significance (Capra, 1982). Scientific materialism concerns
itself exclusively with the realm of external relations and is “ruled by a
methodological aversion to the recognition of higher levels of grades of
significance” (Schumacher 1977 p. 43). Physicist
and philosopher Sir Arthur Eddington (Eddington, 1929; Wilber, 1984) asserts
that the business of science is to “study the linkage of pointer readings with
pointer readings”. Science has nothing
to say regarding the intrinsic/essential nature of its objects of study. The strength of this approach is that it
enables maximal precision and objectivity.
It becomes a handicap only if it considers itself to be the only
methodology for knowledge acquisition.
"The present danger does not really lie in the loss of universality
on the part of the scientist, but rather then in his pretense and claim of
totality... What we have to deplore
therefore is not so much that scientists are specializing, but rather the fact
that specialists are generalizing. The true nihilism of today is
reductionism... contemporary nihilism is camouflaged as nothing-but-ness. Human
phenomena are thus turned into epiphenomena" (Frankl xxx)
In the view of physicist and Noble laureate Erwin
Schrodinger (Schrodinger , 1964; Wilber, 1984, p. 81) "the scientific picture of
the real world around me is very deficient. It gives a lot of factual
information, puts all our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it
is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to out heart, that
really matters to us… we do not belong to the material world the science
constructs for us". Schrodinger
asserts that we lie outside of the scientific picture of the world; we only
think we belong to it because our bodies are in it. In the words of Ken Wilber (1998 p. 56), “the
language of science is only an "it-language, with no conscious, no
interiors, no values, no meaning, no depth, and no Divinity".
Although the worldview of scientific materialism dominates
the current stage of cultural evolution, there is evidence new, more complex
and profound worldviews are emerging into the mainstream as one aspect of an
ongoing cultural transformation.
Developmental psychologists have come to an understanding
that the self is not a static entity but a complex dynamic evolving
system. The psychology of the mature
human being is an unfolding, emergent, spiraling process characterized by the
progressive subordination of older structures of consciousness to newer, higher
order structures (Beck & Cowan, 1996; Wilber, K. 2000;
Gebser, 1985). Each stage or
“worldspace” of this developmental process is a state of consciousness that
exhibits a particular psychology. Each
worldspace is a stage through which developing people pass on their way to
other states of being. Each person’s
values, worldview, and general outlook on life is
appropriate to the worldspace that is prominent in their consciousness. This approach recognizes that there are many
different values and worldviews which characterize an individual’s state (of
consciousness); that humans develop by progressing from simpler to more complex
states; that any individual may access various different states depending upon
their life situations; that more complex states provide more “degrees of
freedom” for problem solving then simpler ones; and that many of the apparently
insoluble problems that emerge within a give state can best be addressed through
the emergence of a more complex state.
Cultural evolution can be viewed as a progression of
worldspaces (Gebser, 1985). The character of a culture is determined by the
worldspace that dominates that society.
Cultural transitions can be viewed as periods when a new worldspace
emerges to replace an older one. Evidence
suggests that we are now in the midst of a transition to the next phase of
human culture as a new “integral” worldspace emerges. “We are seemingly between two epochs: the
dying sensate (materialist) culture of our magnificent yesterday and the coming
ideational (integral) culture of the creative tomorrow. We are living, thinking, and acting at the
end of a brilliant six-hundred-year-long sensate day… The present crisis
represents only a disintegration of the sensate form of Western society and
culture, to be followed by a new integration as notable in its own way as was
the sensate form in the days of its glory and climax” (Sorokin 1941).
Gebser (Gebser, 1985) has provided a detailed description of
the nascence of the integral worldspace within mathematics, physics, biology,
psychology, philosophy, jurisprudence, sociology, economics, the arts, and
literature. In a extensive set of
national interviews conducted over thirteen years and reaching over 100,000
Americans, a research group led by Paul Ray (Ray & Anderson, 2000) has tracked the emergence of the corresponding
integral subculture (which Ray calls “the Core Cultural Creatives”) in
America. Defining characteristics of the
integral worldspace are the recognition and acceptance of both the diversity of
forms and the unity that underlies that diversity, and the nascent awakening of
the spiritual faculties.
Integral thinking moves beyond the relativism of the current stage of (post)modern culture to recognize transcendent universals. Transcendental nondualism eclipses scientific materialism as the dominant worldview (Harman, 1998, Wilber 1984). Werner Heisenberg expressed the ultimate goal of integral science and philosophy as the formulation of a common representation of the “one”- the unitary principle behind all phenomena, the ultimate source of all understanding. Wholeness, healing fragmentation, transdisciplinary thinking, and transrational insight are emphasized. Individuals at this stage are highly idealistic, dedicated to world healing and transformation. Their thinking transcends the toxic battle between worldspaces to embrace the full spectrum of consciousness, recognizing each stage as a necessary and valuable step in the realization of human potential. No longer concerned with political correctness or the opinion of the peer group, they will adopt whatever framework can most efficiently address the problem at hand. The signatory characteristic of this stage is a strong focus on personal transformation, spiritual awakening, service to humanity, and inner work to develop human potential, augmenting the “green” values of the current postmodern worldspace with dedication to personal growth and spirituality.
Gebser (1985) concludes that the new integral mutation of
consciousness “receives its decisive stamp from the manifest perceptual
emergence of the spiritual”. The
integral stage of spiritual development, which can be most clearly observed in
the relatively advanced practitioners of the world’s spiritual traditions,
embraces profound transformation, a “quantum leap” in consciousness,
understanding, and perception (Wilber, 1998; Beck, & Cowan, 1996). Whereas
in previous stages the spiritual was approached emotionally, imaginatively,
abstractly, or conceptually, at the integral stage it is “perceptible
concretely as it begins to coalesce with our consciousness”. The belief character of religion is
superceded by “praeligion, i.e., ever present, evident, and conscious connection
with the divinitary whole” (Gebser, 1985; Feuerstein, 1987) which at this stage
is revealed as an all-pervading
spiritual nature which permeates the universe. This experience is viewed as utterly real,
although it, like any truly unique experience, cannot be communicated in terms
understandable to those who do not share it.
Within the integral worldspace, which subordinates the rational worldspace of modern science to a higher order structure of consciousness, scientific empiricism is easily integrated with spiritual insight. In synchrony with the emerging integral consciousness structure, the metaphysical foundations of modern science have shifted away from the materialism of classical physics toward a form more accommodating to the integral worldview (described in detail below). This revolution in thinking has initiated a fundamental paradigm shift in our understanding of the nature of matter and its relation to consciousness (Capra, F. 1982, Wilber 1984).
In the face of a multitude of paradoxes inherent in the
quantum mechanical description of the atomic and subatomic world, physicists
have come to the realization that their basic concepts, language, and
materialist worldview are inadequate for understanding the implications of
their experimental results. Perhaps the
most basic and pervasive feature of the quantum mechanical description of
nature is its “fundamentally holistic character” (Stapp, 1982; Kafatos &
Nadeau, 2000; Bohm, 1982, Harris, 1988). Observable aspects of reality such as
quantum nonlocality have given rise to descriptions of matter in which each
particle is fundamentally related to every other particle in the universe,
through its participation in an “unbroken wholeness” which lies beyond the
reach of science. According to Stapp,
“the fundamental process of Nature lies outside spacetime but generates events
that can be located in space-time”. Kafatous
& Nadeau (2000) explain that “the whole whose existence is inferred in
experiments testing Bells’ theorem cannot be fully disclosed or described by
physical theory and that the parts exist in some sense within this whole… we
are confronted with a fundamental reality that exists completely outside the
domain of physics.” It has become clear
that science is not in contact with ultimate reality, that it is describing
“the waves, not the water of the ocean of reality” (Eddington, 1929; Wilber
1984). Ordinary notions of space, time,
and separately existent material particles are being viewed as abstractions
derived from this deeper order.
Increasing numbers of physicists are asserting that, when
the full range of experience is considered, an integral worldview is more
plausible then scientific materialism (Harman, 1998), and proposing that
consciousness is necessary to bring the universe into being (Von Neuman, 1955;
Kafatos & Nadeau, 2000; Goswami, 1995).
The principle founders of modern science (including Einstein,
Schrodinger, Heisenberg, Pauli, DeBroglie, and Plank) rejected the positivism
and materialism of the rational worldspace and espoused (in one form or
another) an integral worldview (Wilber 1984).
Objects emerge from a transcendent possibility domain into the realm of
physical manifestation when (nonlocal) consciousness “collapses the wave function”. Consciousness is being
viewed as an aspect of the “unbroken wholeness” which is the source and ground
of all existence (Bohm, 1982). Positing consciousness as a more
fundamental aspect of reality then space-time or matter-energy may be necessary
in order to resolve the many paradoxes inherent in materialist interpretations
of quantum mechanics (Goswami, 1995).
Bohm has proposed that consciousness be viewed as a
fundamental aspect of the "holomovement", i.e. the dynamics of the
implicate order. In this context,
individual consciousness can be viewed as a manifestation of the universal
consciousness, and evolution can be seen as a creative process of progressive
manifestation of the attributes of universal consciousness in the form of life
and mind. Since human
consciousness is the most fully articulated expression of universal
consciousness, Kafatous & Nadeau (2000), following Harris (1988), have
suggested that. “human consciousness may fold
within itself the fundamental logical principle of the conscious
universe”.
These scientists observe that the fact that this whole
cannot be a direct object of scientific inquiry or knowledge “does not mean
that science invalidates the prospect that we can apprehend this wholeness on a
level that is prior to conscious constructs”, i.e.
through spiritual experiences which involve “acts of communion with the whole”
(p. 159). Although scientific knowledge
allows us to infer the existence of the single significant whole, it cannot
fully affirm or prove its existence.
However, if these scientists are correct in asserting that human
consciousness may fold within itself the fundamental logical principle of the
conscious universe, then the attributes of this whole may be apprehended
through a form of inner “knowledge-by-identity”[i]. Integrating these spiritual modes of knowing
with scientific empiricism may produce a more complete vision of the cosmos.
St. Bonaventure taught that
humans possess at least three different modes of knowing: the “eye of the
flesh” ( i.e. the physical senses), which disclose the
material world; the “eye of the mind” ( i.e. the rational faculty), which
discloses the symbolic, conceptual world, and the “eye of contemplation” ( i.e.
the spiritual faculty), which discloses the spiritual, transcendental,
transpersonal world. These three worlds
are not separate- they represent three different aspects of the one cosmos,
revealed by different modes of perception (Wilber, 1983; 1998). Similar ideas can be found in virtually all
of the major religions and schools of traditional philosophy (Wilber, 1980;
Smith, 1976; Schuon, 1976).
This teaching holds that each of these "eyes" discloses its own truths in its own realm, and none of them can be reduced to the others. The physical sciences are grounded in the observations of the "eye of the flesh". Similarly, we can view the "spiritual sciences" - represented by the esoteric/contemplative schools of the major religions - as being grounded in the perceptions of the "eye of contemplation". Ian Barbour (1990), in describing the parallels between the structure of religion and the structure of science, has asserted that both science and religion are grounded in "data" and that both make propositions that can be assessed based on their agreement with the data. "The data for a religious community consist of the distinctive experiences of individuals" (p.36). Barbour labels the most common forms of spiritual experience as "numenous experience of the holy" and the "mystical experience of unity". He describes the latter as "the experience of the unity of all things, found in the depth of the individual soul and in the world of nature. Unity is achieved in the discipline of meditation and is characterized by joy, harmony, serenity, and peace. In its extreme form the unity can be described as selflessness and loss of individuality the joy as bliss or rapture".
In the integral worldview human consciousness exists as a
continuum of states ranging from the gross/ordinary to the subtle/contemplative.
Spiritual awakening changes our
perception of the cosmos by progressively attuning us to more profound levels
of understanding (Wilber 1980), or "higher grades of significance" (Schumacher 1977). Transrational modes of knowing, which access
these “levels of subtle mind”, may be able to provide insight into facets of
reality which are inaccessible to the measuring apparatus of science. In the words of biologist Francisco Varela,
“it is important to note that these levels of subtle mind are not theoretical;
instead they are delineated rather precisely on the basis of actual experience,
and they merit respectful attention by anyone who claims to rely on empirical
science… An understanding of these levels of subtle mind requires a sustained,
disciplined, and well-informed meditation practice. In a sense, these phenomena are open only to
those who are willing to carry out the experiments, as it were. That some form of special training is needed
for firsthand experience of new realm of phenomena is not surprising… But in
traditional science, such phenomena remain hidden from view, since most
scientists still avoid any disciplined study of their own experience, whether
through meditation or other introspective methods.”
For the trained contemplatives, who are the only true
experts in these matters, the wisdom of contemplation is viewed "as a
direct, nonconceptual intuition that is beyond words, concepts and dualities;
hence it is described as transverbal, transrational, and nondual" (Walsh,
1993, p. 223). Apparently, this
knowledge is not shaped by language, concepts, cultural "forms of
life", etc. because the Real transcends, surrounds, and overflows the
categories of thought [ii]
(Radhakrishnan, 1940, p. 43). The
process of interpreting spiritual experiences using concepts and beliefs
utilizes the "eye of the mind".
When sapiential knowledge is studied without the requisite contemplative
training, the more subtle, profound, state-specific aspects tend to be
overlooked. Walsh (1993, p. 225)
explains that "when we cannot comprehend the higher grades of
significance, we can blithely believe that we have fully understood something
whose true significance we have completely missed". Although philosophical
systems can and are derived from contemplative knowledge (see the next
section), the fundamental transrational insights may be comprehensible only to
those who have adequately trained their "eye of contemplation".
Increasing numbers of researchers and philosophers (Foreman
1990, 1998, 1999; Andresen & Foreman, 2001) are challenging the prevailing
methodologies in the academic study of spirituality - which have centered on
linguistic and cultural analysis -and particularly the postmodern and
deconstructivist approaches championed by Derrida and others. They have concluded that modern philosophy of
mysticism has misrepresented a class of “nondual” mystical experiences by
interpreting them using a "Kantian" epistemology derived from studies
of ordinary human experience. Perovich
(1990) asserts that this philosophy "rests on a mistake, the mistake of
assuming that mystical experience is narrowly 'human' experience and, so, is
subject to the same treatment as is 'human' experience generally. But the mystics insist that their knowledge
is gained as the result of employing faculties which are not the ordinary
'human' ones. At the very least, these
claims translate as denials of the validity of 'Kantian' epistemology in the
mystical sphere".
It is becoming increasingly clear that, in the realm of
mystical experience, the assumption of “epistemological uniformity” - that all
human experience is essentially the same - is unwarranted. The foundational assumption of the
constructivist view (Katz 1983) - that all states of consciousness are
intentional and culturally mediated - appears to be inapplicable to certain
classes of spiritual experience, and seems to be refuted by the existence of
"pure consciousness events".
These events (which have been described independently in the writings of
many different cultures throughout recorded history) involve a state of pure
consciousness with no content, and hence no mediation and no
intentionality. The mystical experience
of "knowledge by identity", in which the separation between subject
and object of knowledge disappears has been erroneously reinterpreted by
“Kantians” as intentional, mediated experience, in which the subject and object
of knowledge are clearly distinct. This
distorted view of mystical experience tends to overemphasize cultural
relativity and undercuts the objectivity and universality of mystical
experience. For this reason it is
important that academics who study mystical experience be trained in
contemplative practice so that they have some "taste" of the
experience that they are studying.
Ken Wilber has pioneered the development of a “integral scientific method” that incorporates spiritual
practice and its experiential data (Wilber 1983). He asserts that we can accept as valid all
knowledge claims that can be verified using the following three-stage method:
This approach emphasizes the "empirical" grounding
of sapiential knowledge using the “eye of contemplation”. It also follows that we are not qualified to
challenge the truth claims of either physical science or integral science until
we have completed the injunctive and apprehensive stages of the appropriate
validation method. In the words of
On his basis we can envision the development of a “integral science”, grounded in an integrated epistemology
that embraces multiple levels of significance.
It will require that, in addition to
sensory experience and its empiricism and mental experience and its
rationalism, we add spiritual experience and its mysticism (spiritual practice
and its experiential data). In this
view, the transrational faculties support the spiritual science of essence,
absolutes, and unity, an essential complement to the material sciences (e.g.
physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) of substance, relativity, and
multiplicity. We envision a nested
holarchy of integral sciences, ranging from the most narrow, precise, and
reductionist at the lowest level of significance (traditional natural sciences)
to the most unitive at the highest level of significance. Each new level of ever deepening sapiential
experience brings forth a new level of significance in one’s observations of
the cosmos and hence enables a new, more integral, level of science.
The spiritual Reality reveals itself to the awakened
faculties as a numenous presence underlying, enfolding, and shining through the
forms of the cosmos, a creative presence in which we “live and move and have
our being”. The self-conscious ego,
which is the root of the experience of individuality, becomes transparent to
the radiance of the universal Self, the “Mind of Christ”, the eternal,
unqualified source of Being. This emptiness of ego-self, which constitutes
true humility, is a release from the illusory identifications which keep us
bound to our personal vantage point. It
is the ultimate release from enslavement by the compulsion to define ourselves
–to fill our “God-shaped hole”- through knowledge, accomplishments,
possessions- the freedom to simple be an expression of the glorious radiance of
that-which-is. Developing and
strengthening this connection with the One by clearing away the “veils” which
separate us from the ground of Being is the principle
task of the path of spiritual development.
As the practice of mindfulness
deepens, the focused and illuminated consciousness pierces the veil of
thoughts, images and emotions to behold “that which transpires behind that
which appears”. As we let go of the
habit of viewing the world as representation -mediating every percept with a
concept- and begin to perceive it as transparency, we dissolve the duality of
mediated consciousness and awaken to a new world of knowledge-by-identity, as
if we have emerged from a stupor to fully perceive reality for the first time. In the words of
Jellaludin Rumi, “to the extent that we are able to receive unveiled light we
may behold with the eye of the vast Ocean of Reality that which is now hidden
from the eye of phenomena” (Nicholson, 1926).
In the “achronon” (the time-free present) we awaken to -what Heisenberg
(1974) has described as- the “translucence of the
eternal splendor of the One shining through the
material phenomena”. In this “long, loving look at the Real” we realize a new
dimension of reality which lies beyond time and space, infusing and informing
the material world. This state is
characterized by a greatly heightened awareness of attributes such as love,
harmony, beauty, majesty, splendor, peace, etc. in both the inner and outer
experience. In the awakened state we
perceive radiant beauty at every turn, whether we are looking at a sunset or a
crumpled beer can on a garbage heap. To quote the Koran (2,115) “Wheresoever you turn, there is the face
of God”. It awakens an intuitive
understanding of the “Unity of All Being” as we recognize the “Buddha Nature”
-the radiance of Origin- in the diaphaneity of all forms.
This experience changes one’s perception of the world and
consequently one’s worldview. Just as
the materialist worldview arises from the (exclusive) observation of the
external, material aspect of phenomena, the integral worldview arises from the
observation of the essential numenous nature of all phenomena. In the integral
worldview, nature is viewed as a focus for the divine manifestation, as the
medium par excellence through which that uncreated beauty reveals itself and
exercises creative activity. In the
words of Sri Aurobindo (1983): “a timeless and incorporeal One became the
ground as well as the dynamic source of the existence of a temporal and
material and extremely multiple and variegated universe”. Erwin Schrodinger, while advocating an integral
worldview in his essay “Oneness of Mind” (Schrodinger, 1967; Wilber, 1984) quotes the sufi mystic Aziz Nasafi:
“The spiritual world is one single spirit who stands like unto a light behind
the bodily world and who, when any single creature comes into being, shines
through it like a window. According to
the kind or size of the window less or more light enters the world. The light itself however remains
unchanged”. The splendor of the
One is experienced both internally as the ground of one’s individual
consciousness and externally manifesting in and through the forms of the
cosmos. The spiritual Origin, when viewed from an internal perspective, is
revealed to the realizing perception as “Atman”, the eternal, beatific,
universal Self. When viewed from an
external perspective, it is understood as “Brahman”- the source and ground of
all manifestation. Hence, the essence of
every human –the deepest part of every being- is not temporal or relative, but
eternal and absolute, participating in the
One of the most profound expressions of this integral vision
has been formulated by Sri Aurobindo (1983) in his classic “Life Divine”. Aurobindo explains that as our spiritual
faculties awaken, “Matter reveals itself to the realizing thought and to the
subtilised senses as the figure and body of Spirit, Spirit in its
self-formative extension. Spirit reveals itself through the same consenting
agents as the soul, the truth, the essence of Matter. Both admit and confess
each as divine, real, and essentially one.
Mind and life are disclosed in that illumination as at once figures and
instruments of the Supreme Conscious Being by which It
extends and houses Itself in material form and in that form unveils Itself to
Its multiple centers of consciousness”.
Integral spirituality
is a celebration of the sacredness of the natural world, grounded in the
“numenous experience of the holy”.
Albert Einstein explained that this mystical experience is the “source
of all true wisdom”, which frees us from the delusion of separate existence “by
widening our circle of understanding and compassion, to embrace all living creatures
in the whole of nature and its beauty. In the awakened state, all of nature is viewed
as sacred, as an expression or reflection of the splendor of the One. This realization transforms one's relation to
the rest of the cosmos. It cultivates awe,
wonder, and radical amazement at the marvel of all that is.
The concept of natural evolution finds a prominent and
expanded formulation within the integral worldview, in which physical, personal
(developmental), cultural, and spiritual evolution are all viewed as aspects of
a single process of concretion of the spiritual (Wilber, 1995). In the integral view of conscious evolution,
challenges awaken systems within people and societies designed to cope with or
adapt to those specific conditions. The
crisis of our times and our world is perceived as challenging humanity to
access the integral structure of consciousness.
It is the most visible effect of a process of complete transformation,
which could potentially lead to either global catastrophe or global renewal
(Gebser, 1985; Sorokin,
1941; Harman, 1998; Capra, 1982). Gebser
explains: “The way out of the dead end
of the deficient rational structure of consciousness is the way of personal
participation in, and cooperation with, the emergent mode of consciousness… If
we do not overcome the crisis it will overcome us; and only someone who has
overcome himself is truly able to overcome.
Either we will be disintegrated and dispersed, or we must resolve and
effect integrality”. The emerging
integral archetype can be envisioned as a noospheric attractor which is drawing
humanity beyond its limitations into further dimensions of consciousness and
levels of perception. As our inner work
of spiritual development nurtures the emergence of integral consciousness we
contribute to the global awakening of humanity.
Visions of conscious
evolution have been developed by visionaries of many spiritual traditions. From the Sufi perspective (Inayat Kahn,
1999), the final purpose of cosmic evolution is realized in the ultimate
destiny of humanity as the conscious reflection of the divine within the
limitations of physical existence. “The
Universe is discovering and recreating itself as it evolves through the course
of our human lives. Thus our conscious
participation in creating the future can be seen as an extension of the
self-organizing activity of the universe”.
We begin to consciously participate in this process of “hominization” (Teilhard De
Chardin, 1976) when we awaken to the profound meaningfulness and
excruciating beauty that is attempting to emerge in our being, as the eternal
manifests in the temporal through our acts, values, presence and countenance. “Mind
attains its self-fulfillment when it becomes a pure mirror of the Truth of
Being which expresses itself in the symbols of the universe; Life, when it
consciously lends its energies to the perfect self-figuration of the Divine in
ever-new forms and activities of the universal existence” (Aurobindo, 1983).
This experience
confers a profound sense of both nobility and humility as we recognize the
awesome majesty of our divine inheritance dwelling within the impoverishment of
our human condition. Through dedication
to our “inner commission” to self transcendence we serve as cocreators in this
rebirthing process, participating in the fulfillment of the purpose of
creation.
These transrational insights are perhaps best expressed in art, poetry, and music, as, for example, in the following rendition of the writings of the Sufi master Hafiz (Ladinsky, 1996):
Light
Will someday split you open
Even if your life is now a cage.
Little by little,
You will turn into stars.
Little by little,
You will turn into
The whole sweet, amorous Universe.
Love will surely burst you wide open
Into an unfettered, booming new galaxy.
You will become so free
In a wonderful, secret
And pure Love
That flows
From a conscious,
One-pointed,
Infinite Light.
Even then, my dear,
The Beloved will have fulfilled
Just a fraction,
Just a fraction!
Of a promise
He wrote upon your heart.
For a divine seed, the crown of destiny,
Is hidden and sown on an ancient, fertile plain
You hold the title to.
O look again within yourself,
For I know you were once the elegant host
To all the marvels in creation.
When your soul begins
To ever bloom and laugh
And spin in Eternal Ecstasy-
O little by little,
You will turn into God.
Andresen, J. & Foreman, R. 2001. Cognitive Models and
Spiritual Maps. Imprint
Academic.
Aurobindo, S. 1983. The
Life Divine. All
Barbour,
Beck, D. & Cowan, C. 1996. Spiral Dynamics. Blackwell Publishers,
Bohm, D. 1982. Wholeness
and the Implicate Order. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Bohm, D. 1987.
Unfolding Meaning.
Capra, F, 2000. The Tao of Physics
: An Exploration of the Parallels Between Modern Physics and Eastern
Mysticism. Shambhala,
Coomaraswamy, A. 1943. Hinduism and Buddhism. Philosophical Library,
Eddington, E. 1929. Science and the Unseen
World.
Einstein, A. 1954. Ideas and Opinions. Crown,
Forman, R. editor. 1999. Mysticism, Mind, Consciousness.
Forman, R. editor. 1998. The Innate Capacity: Mysticism, Psychology,
Philosophy.
Fox, M. 1983. Meditations with
Meister Eckhart. Bear &
Co.,
Fox, W. 1990. Toward a
Transpersonal Ecology, Shambhala,
Forman, R. editor. 1990. The Problem of Pure Consciousness.
Feuerstein, G.
1987. Structures of Consciousness.
Integral Publishing,
Gebser, J., 1985.
The Ever-Present Origin.
Goldstein, J. 1976.
The Experience of Insight. Unity Press.
Goswami, Amit, 1995.
The Self-Aware Universe.
Goodenough, U. 2001.
Vertical and Horizontal Transcendence. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science. 36 (March): 21-31.
Grof, S. editor. 1984.
Ancient Wisdom and Modern Science.
Harman, W. 1998. Global Mind Change: The Promise of the 21st
Century. Berrett-Koehler.
Harris, E. 1988. “Contemporary Physics and
Dialetical Holism”. In
Heisenberg, W. 1974. Across the Frontiers.
Harper and Row,
Heisenberg, W. 1958. The Physicist’s Conception of Nature. Harcourt, Brace & Company,
Hick, J. 1982. God has Many Names. Westminister Press,
Huxley, A. 1945. The Perennial Philosophy.
Harper & Brothers,
Huxley, A. 1993. “The Perennial Philosophy”. In (Walsh et. al., 1993, p. 212).
Inayat Kahn, H. 1979. The Unity of
Religious Ideals (Vol 9). Omega Publications, New
Inayat Kahn, H. 1979. Spiritual
Inayat Kahn, H. 1999. Nature
Meditations Omega Publications, New
Inayat Kahn, V. 1999.
Awakening: A Sufi Experience.
James, W. 1902. The Varieties of Religious Experience. Longmans, Green & Co.,
Jeans, J. 1931.
The Mysterious Universe.
Jung, J. 1958. The Undiscovered Self. New American Library.
Kafatos, M. & Nadeau, R. 2000. The Conscious Universe: Parts and Wholes in Physical Reality. Springer.
Keating, T. 1999. Open Mind, Open Heart. Continuum,
Kitchener, R. editor.
1988. The World View of Contemporary
Physics.
Kornfeld, J. 1984.
“The Smile of the Buddha: Paradigms in Perspective”. In
Grof (1984).
Ladinsky, D. 1996. I Heard God Laughing: Renderings of Hafiz. Mobius Press,
Lerner, M. 2000. Spirit
Matters. Hampton
Roads Publishing Co.,
Laszlo, E. 1999. The Whispering Pond: A Personal Guide to the
Emerging Vision of Science. Harper Collins.
Laszlo, E. 1995. The Interconnected Universe: Conceptual
Foundations of Transdisciplinary Unified Theory. Harper Collins.
Lovejoy, A. 1964 (1936) The Great Chain of Being.
Marechal, J. 1927.
Studies in the Psychology of the Mysticsm trans. Agar
Nicholson, R. 1926.
The Mathnawi of Jalaluddin Rumi. Trustees of the “E.J.W. Gibb Memorial”,
Otto, R. 1960. Mysticism East and West.
Pagels, H, 1982.
The Cosmic Code. Bantam,
Perovich 1990. “Does the Philosophy of Mysticism Rest on a
Mistake?” In Foreman
(1990), p. 237.
Pratt, J. 1923 The
Religious Consciousness.
Radhakrishnan, 1940 (1929).
Indian Philosophy.
Vol. 1.
Blackie & Sons,
Smith, H. 1976.
Forgotten Truth: The Primordial Tradition. Harper & Row,
Sorokin, P. 1941. Crisis
of Our Age.
Stapp, H.P. 1982.
“Mind, Matter & Quantum Mechanics”. Foundations of Physics, 12: 363-398.
Ray, Paul & Anderson, S.
2000. The Cultural
Creatives. Harmony
Books,
Rumi, J. 1996.
Rumi: Jewels of Remembrance. Translation by
Camille and Kabir Helminski. Threshold Books, 1996
Schuon, F. 1975.
The Transcendent Unity of Religions. Harper & Row,
Schrodinger, E. 1967. What is Life.
Schrodinger, E. 1964. My View of the World.
Schumacher, E. F. 1977. A guide for the perplexed. Harper & Row,
Stace, W.T. 1960 Mysticism and
Philosophy Macmillan,
Teilhard
De Chardin, P. 1976. The Phenomenon of
Underhill, E. 1974. Mysticism.
Walsh, R. & F. Vaughan. 1993. Paths Beyond Ego.
Wilber, K. 1998. The Marriage of
Sense and Soul, Random House,
Wilber, K. 1995. Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The
Spirit of Evolution, Shambhala,
Wilber, K editor. 1984. Quantum
Questions: Mystical Writings of the World's Great Physicists. Shambhala,
Wilber, K. 1983. Eye to Eye: The Quest for the New Paradigm. Anchor Press /
Wilber, K. 1980.
The Atman Project. Quest.,
[i] As physicist Sir Arthur Eddington (1929) explains, “it is by looking into our own nature that we first discover the failure of the physical universe to be co-extensive with our experience of reality. In our own nature, or through the contact of our consciousness with a nature transcending ours, there are other things which claim the same kind of recognition- a sense of beauty, of morality, and finally, the root of all spiritual religion, an experience which we describe as the presence of God. It is the essence of religion that it presents this side of experience as a matter of everyday life. To live in it, we have to grasp it in the form of familiar recognition and not as a series of abstract scientific statements."
[ii] Before one begins a spiritual practice, one’s inner state invariably consists of a continuous stream of thoughts, completely enmeshed in the historical/cultural world. . It is natural at this stage to assume that this state of “samsara” is the universal nature of human consciousness. However, as meditative practice deepens, one begins to observe gaps between thoughts. “As meditation slowly moves one away from sensation and thought, the formative role of background and context slowly slips away” (Andresen & Foreman, 2001). Practitioners eventually learn to disidentify with their thoughts. Thoughts drift across the expanse of the mind like clouds across the sky. The significant (transrational) experience is the sky, not the clouds. The Sufis (Inayat Kahn, 1999) say that conceptual knowledge veils transrational knowing- contemplative insight occurs when the clouds part revealing the vast splendor of the sky.