History and Dharma (6)
Alright, is "adopting the conceptual referents of Lankavatara or Avatamsaka sutra into a green altitude mindset" a problem in itself? Oh, yes! Frankly, it's quite a problem, since you're actually down-adopting some post-turquoise reports of a nondual insight into a tier-blind (i.e. green) structure, plus without that 1st person insight, so the problem is twofold - at least - and it requires a twofold solution.
But then, is "stabilizing at orange altitude/rational and developing quite a competence in states" somewhat better? Somewhat, but then such an individual would still interpret his/her realization in rational (orange) and probably relativistic (green) terms, without admitting the possibility of higher structures - and would be passing such limitation unto others, backed by indisputable realization. That is, Dharmakaya may be running quite smoothly, but Rupakaya is a bit outdated (running on 18th century Reason and "keeping it real!"). You can be a traditional arahant, modern arahant, postmodern arahant... amber bodhisattva, green bodhisattva, turquoise bodhisattva... If your manifest being is unobstructed responsiveness itself, why stop at any structure? If emptiness is indeed radical openness one with everything that's emerging, why not be one with the edge of evolution, embracing a critical update for your ego?
Since structure-stages and state-stages may unfold quasi-independently, this necessitates a dual center of gravity, one that may be annotated as altitude/state, such as 8/nd for turquoise altitude and nondual competence, or 4/c for amber altitude and causal/formless competence. This indeed opens up the whole question of their connection, because they are quasi-independent, not entirely unrelated.
We can safely presume that, in regular circumstances, until one breaks through the cultural ceiling (which may occur in adolescence, but unlikely before), there's no developmental impetus for serious state-training. We can also presume that post-turquoise, 3rd tier structures begin to spontaneously difuse the wakefullness into deeper states (i.e. gross toward subtle), along with frequent peak-experiencing in all four domains. Naturally, there are many other factors to consider, but these provide us with a crucial way to make sense of development in a time where it's not sufficient to distinguish between a "meditative" and "non-meditative" mind, nor between a highly developed and under-developed, but instead use both scales to gauge the unfathomable.
While structures may be relatively permanent - stable and resilient as in autopoietic - they're also affected by changes in states, and states change may be monitored, and discussed, in both upper quadrants. While structure growth is definitely a four-quadrant affair, regular meditation practice may indeed facilitate and accelerate growth in favorable circumstances, as it basicaly represents a series of mini-transformations that lubricate the structural unfolding.
Structures, on the other hand, are what is present as samsara at any given moment in history. At this moment, rational/orange and pluralistic/green altitude structures are not some of highest available patterns of development available. Would Gautama Buddha's awakening have a lesser impact if He chose to propagate the Dharma mainly from a mythic/absolutist level, or even a rational one? What's your hunch?
Being completely awakened means, therefore, at least, having access to all great states AND having developed through all available structures of consciousness. It was exactly what the Gautama Buddha did, long ago in ancient India, when he proclaimed the timeless Nirvana in highest terms available at that time.
(to be continued)
Note: Dustin DiPerna presents a comprehensive approach by applying the principles outlined in Ken Wilber's "Integral Spirituality" to religious studies. Please have a look at his Infinite Ladder chapter, download here. The site also offers an intro to Religious Orientation (see outline) by combining stages and types.
But then, is "stabilizing at orange altitude/rational and developing quite a competence in states" somewhat better? Somewhat, but then such an individual would still interpret his/her realization in rational (orange) and probably relativistic (green) terms, without admitting the possibility of higher structures - and would be passing such limitation unto others, backed by indisputable realization. That is, Dharmakaya may be running quite smoothly, but Rupakaya is a bit outdated (running on 18th century Reason and "keeping it real!"). You can be a traditional arahant, modern arahant, postmodern arahant... amber bodhisattva, green bodhisattva, turquoise bodhisattva... If your manifest being is unobstructed responsiveness itself, why stop at any structure? If emptiness is indeed radical openness one with everything that's emerging, why not be one with the edge of evolution, embracing a critical update for your ego?
Since structure-stages and state-stages may unfold quasi-independently, this necessitates a dual center of gravity, one that may be annotated as altitude/state, such as 8/nd for turquoise altitude and nondual competence, or 4/c for amber altitude and causal/formless competence. This indeed opens up the whole question of their connection, because they are quasi-independent, not entirely unrelated.
We can safely presume that, in regular circumstances, until one breaks through the cultural ceiling (which may occur in adolescence, but unlikely before), there's no developmental impetus for serious state-training. We can also presume that post-turquoise, 3rd tier structures begin to spontaneously difuse the wakefullness into deeper states (i.e. gross toward subtle), along with frequent peak-experiencing in all four domains. Naturally, there are many other factors to consider, but these provide us with a crucial way to make sense of development in a time where it's not sufficient to distinguish between a "meditative" and "non-meditative" mind, nor between a highly developed and under-developed, but instead use both scales to gauge the unfathomable.
While structures may be relatively permanent - stable and resilient as in autopoietic - they're also affected by changes in states, and states change may be monitored, and discussed, in both upper quadrants. While structure growth is definitely a four-quadrant affair, regular meditation practice may indeed facilitate and accelerate growth in favorable circumstances, as it basicaly represents a series of mini-transformations that lubricate the structural unfolding.
Structures, on the other hand, are what is present as samsara at any given moment in history. At this moment, rational/orange and pluralistic/green altitude structures are not some of highest available patterns of development available. Would Gautama Buddha's awakening have a lesser impact if He chose to propagate the Dharma mainly from a mythic/absolutist level, or even a rational one? What's your hunch?
Being completely awakened means, therefore, at least, having access to all great states AND having developed through all available structures of consciousness. It was exactly what the Gautama Buddha did, long ago in ancient India, when he proclaimed the timeless Nirvana in highest terms available at that time.
(to be continued)
Note: Dustin DiPerna presents a comprehensive approach by applying the principles outlined in Ken Wilber's "Integral Spirituality" to religious studies. Please have a look at his Infinite Ladder chapter, download here. The site also offers an intro to Religious Orientation (see outline) by combining stages and types.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home