Participatory Spirituality for the 21st Century
* FYI, theurjism is the term for my unique neologisms.
You may have noticed that I use a few terms that are not in the dictionary, that I've made up to get across a meaning that is also not in the dictionary. So let me clarify at least two of them for the moment. Kennilingus* is one such term. It is a take on the word “cunnilingus” with which you are already familiar. The “kenni” part refers to Ken Wilber, so it's a sort of play on one who licks Wilber. This of course is metaphorical, not meaning one who actually gives head to him, although that most certainly could be included, especially since his “suck my dick” comment to critics, which comment it seems acolytes take literally. It's more like those who unflinchingly accept his work verbatim without much, if any, criticism. We all know the type, who when speaking of “integral” will use the exact same language as Wilber, not only in content but often in the same style with the same prejudices. I also use it to refer to the source from when the language comes, to Wilber's own dogma. To make it more akin to fellatio I have another variation for the object of worship in kennilingus, Ken Wilber as Kennilingam. (See this for a definition of lingam, which includes penis but goes into its religious meanings as well, a fit symbol of the AQAL religion.)
To distinguish the alternative integral movement from kennilingus I use the term “intergraal.” “Inter” comes more from the interrelations of the elements of AQAL instead of their rigid distinctions. Granted the elements should be separated out to gain invaluable analysis and clarity. Nor should they be reduced to each other in some form a overarching, dominant and relativistic mush of equality. But neither should they be so distinct as to not see how they relate, for it is in the relationships that any sense of a whole emerges from which the parts participate. And said whole is not THE whole, just a particular whole relative to a particular focus in a particular context. And this doesn't have to be reduced to another form of relativism, since it can also accommodate qualitative distinction and make value judgments so to which wholes are better in which circumstances. Also said parts do not have to be entirely subsumed in any given whole, since they retain their own agency and participate in other wholes in other contexts.
The “graal” of intergraal is the Old French spelling of the term “grail.” We often associate grails with the Holy Grail, the cup that caught the blood of Christ on the cross, and which nectar is purported to induce in one communion with the divine. Hence from such cups in religious masses where wine is transubstantiated into the blood of Christ we are washed of our sins by partaking in this ritualistic cannibalism. But again metaphorically it symbolizes more that communion with the big Other. We can demythologize that other from some metaphysical divinity to a more humane other, to focusing more on humanity in the here and now in this world and in this context, in our present embodiment and interactivity with our environment and other human beings. It is a transforming and perhaps even transubstantiating conversion from our isolated agency to a balance with our human communion through the emerging next wave of development in P2P networks. Hence intergraal is in distinction from the typically more agentic, individualistic, authoritarian, capitalistic and intellectualized kennilingus.
* Aka AQALingus for those more sensitive snowflakes offended by kennilingus. They'll probably be offended by this more innocuous version too though.
Theurjianistic translation/ interpretation = Theurjeneutics? :)
I thought you might appreciate Layman Pascal's neologistic play on Integral Life recently: metaphrandor. (Not only for the word, but for the salacious nature of his metaphors! :-) ).
Has he been reading our forum? Or just a case of synchronous zeitgeist manifesting in different places simultaneously? And yes, I like the hairy vagina metaphorically but must admit I've fallen into the recent fashion preferring the shaved beaver.
From this post:
Playing off the word irreducible... Hmm, I like the implications of the prefix ir and am now contemplating adding it to my theurjianism rhetaphor to make it irrhetaphor. Irrhetaphor cannot be reduced to the simple definitions of both rhetoric (as persuasive human language) or metaphor (as something that stands for something else), but rather is the communicative 'language' between suobjects (and is itself a suobject) at any level. Or something like that...
Since I was recently reminded on the Kennilingam totem in another thread, below is a rough rendition of it from a 12th century manuscript found in a cave near the summit of Mt. Everest. All but one of the expedition were killed in an avalanche. The one remaining crew who provided the document and actual totem is still in an insane asylum where s/he practices daily the 3-2-1 shadow process while performing kennilingus on the totem and humming OMG!
Per the manuscript the chant must be drawn out, OOOOOMMMMMMMMGGGGGG, to access all 3 bodies: gross, subtle and causal. There are specific instructions for the G sound to be GaGaGaGa to invoke the Pop Goddess.
From this post:
Perhaps the word spiretual? That way there is no 'spirit' in terms of metaphysics. It includes the word spire, that pointed structure most churches have to act as a receiver from the heavens above like an antenna. Instead though here spire could be more akin to aspire, that impulse to be a better human being in our relations. Spire is also the root of the words in/expire as well as spirit, Harris pointed out that it means 'breath.' So here we return our focus to the body and breath as that which connects us to the inhabited world, not some space God divorced from us. Though of course it includes space 'out there' as well as space-time right here. And it removes all the metaphysical baggage of spirit that Harris so decries. And perhaps most of all, spiretual when spoken has that accent of a southern, back-woods hillbilly, again grounding in the common instead of the privileged. Actually most of all it would piss off Harris, being not only a neologism but a theurjianism, full of spunky jism.
Hmm, that sounds like the name of an adult alternative band, Spunky Jism, which could also be their break-out hit single. And the line dance named after the song and band. Do the spunky jism, a very sexual dance no doubt, leaving a wet spot on the floor after performance.
Looking back over this thread I never explained the meaning of my internet moniker, theurj. The following is from my blog post of 1/6/11 which does so.
For years my internet pen name has been “theurj.” Occasionally someone will ask what that name means. Some will notice that it can be broken into two words, “the” and “urj,” the latter sounding like “urge.” So of course what is the urge? Many assume the urge is sex, indeed next to eating being a primary, urgent necessity. But there are of course many urges, and the prefix “the” does have specific denotations. For example it is part of the word “theology,” meaning the study of divinity, aka theism. It is also part of the word “theurgy,” where my name has more direct and specific relevance. Theurgy is defined as “a system of beneficent magic practiced by the Egyptian Platonists and others” (see dictionary.com) and translates more directly as god working. Theurj is a diminutive of the magical motto I took upon entering the Golden Dawn back in the mid 90s, which was indeed a modern representative of said Egyptian (neo)Platonists. God working in this regard was specifically related to taking on “godforms” in ritual, i.e., letting various gods inhabit one during the period of the ritual, different gods(desses) depending on the ritual role one played.
Although I left the Order after 6 years on my road to the postmetaphysical, I still retain the internet name because I now connote to it a nondual understanding. It is that combination of divinity (the) with sexuality and body (urj) that together are both, yet neither. They cannot be separated into a dichotomy so hence there is no absolute distinction between god and the devil, spirituality and sexuality, mind and body. Yet there are indeed different, not identical. They are not one, not two, yet two and one. That is, they are nondual in an integral postmetaphysical way, at least as I perceive and interpret it.
From this post:
Weird association but when I hear the word plenum I associate by sound the word frenulum.* Since the latter serves to functionally allow flight by connecting the fore and aft wings on certain insects, perhaps to distinguish the bad from the good metaphysical plenum we might call it plenulum? This way it can take flight from bad metaphysics?
* It is also "a thin strip of flesh on the underside of the penis that connects the shaft to the head." You knew there had to be a sexual meaning in there if I'm using it. Aka the "banjo string." Also relates to female genitalia.
The origin of "circle-jerk jargon" comes from this post, discussing how one's own set of definitions get more and more complex and circular, referring only to themselves in such reiterative loops as to be dizzying and eye-glazing. And very often only fully understandable to the jerker, with little or no concern for a broader communicative interaction as in masturbation.
Still, some (many?) of us are fascinated by watching another masturbate. I guess it fires our mirror neurons and thus there is some kind of resonant transfer, even if not 'intelligible.'