Out of curiosity I did a Google search on the above three words in parentheses as a phrase. In the entire internet there was only one hit and it was to this forum in my discussion of ladder, climber, view. It is a unique phrase and even more, a valid contender for what this forum purports. It might even be a misnomer to call something postmetaphysical "spirituality" given what I said in the thread:

[Referencing "to see a world," see link] "As for turquoise, it reinjects 'Spirit' back into the equation. And therein lies the question for an IPS, how to have a nondual spirituality that doesn’t separate spirituality from the mundane, that doesn’t 'include' the metaphysical interpretations from prior WVs. It might even be an expression of a metaphysical WV holdover to call something 'spirituality,' since the very term indicates the metaphysical notion of an absolute world apart from a relative WV. Granted we can re-define it any way we like but nevertheless its etymology is one of a split, dualistic origin. Another term that can be more easily separated from its metaphysical baggage is 'nondual.' Integral Postmetaphysical nonduality? I’ve already made a strong case that the intersection of American Pragmatism with second generation cognitive science is precisely this WV based on postformal cognitive functioning. And AQAL to boot, though they don’t use those terms."


Views: 1000

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Yes, I was thinking along just those lines, as well: "light" could be considered a subtle body of sorts. This was a suggestion that Tom introduced on the old forum. I don't have these conversations saved in my Google archives, unfortunately. Tom did send me a zip file of old IPS conversations which might contain them, but I haven't been able to open it, and I'm no longer on speaking with terms with Tom, so I can't follow up with him. However, you can find some similar ideas explored here or here.
Yes, I read Grandy's book for that discussion and was almost semi-convinced Tom was on to something. So why no longer on speaking terms?
Has non-local perception actually been established as a fact?
I don't think so. Though I know IONS is working on that sort of thing "scientifically." Though I've always found most of the stuff on that site more than a bit woo woo for my taste. Can you find any "evidence" on the site? Here is a link when I searched for "non local perception."
How about dream knowledge...telepathy etc...I have had heaps of nonlocal psi experience related to kundalini awakening espec. and dreams.

SPIRITUAL— "Spiritual" means to be a whole integrated human...one that is initiated into the intelligence of the heart, kundalini illuminated, supersensory, using psi and subtle senses, using both hemispheres of brain and the enteric brain for fully embodied consciousness. In touch with the Muse, creativity, original thinker, post-conventional morality, engaged in their life mission, giving to community, the earth and all life. Spirituality is more than the known, more that the material and sensoral world and yet it is not dismissive of these, for it is only through material embodiment or incarnation that Spirit can be realized.

SPIRITUAL MATERIALISM—Spiritual materialism...or spirituality used for defense, power, status, profit, sex or whatever other than for the Thing in itself. Religious insanity uses concepts of God to fight battles and wage eternal war on neighbors. Such misguided people could be challenged with proving their God exists in order to normalize rationality in the most expedient manner. It is a universal crime to allow such insanity to continue on Gaia without international law prohibiting it. Spiritual materialism is a dead end. While temporarily enticing it is without substance an ultimately falls under the weight of its pettiness and ineptitude. Only love allows us to build sacred life, divine community and forever futures.


theurj said:
I don't think so. Though I know IONS is working on that sort of thing "scientifically." Though I've always found most of the stuff on that site more than a bit woo woo for my taste. Can you find any "evidence" on the site? Here is a link when I searched for "non local perception."

I know we've been down this path before and I'm not going to labour the point. I'm not convinced by subjective experiences of "non-local" informational transfer, though. I've had one myself, in a dream, and I'm skeptical that I didn't imagine it.
I am not convinced either; to the contrary highly skeptical.
In the Levin thread I brought up Mark Johnson's book The Meaning of the Body in relation to Gendlin. From it I made a point relevant to this thread so I'm copying some of it here.

Structure-forms, as in language, are meaningless in themselves without the felt sense of a body-mind to provide that meaning based in its experience. So culture per se does not reside in the books alone. It requires an embodied person who has been embedded in and developed by a culture to re-embody the meaning back into the words of that book with each reading. Here's the relevant passage:

"The fateful error...is to overlook much of what goes into making something meaningful to us. Then we are seduced into mistaking the forms for that which they inform.... We think that if we have succeeding in abstracting a form...then we have captured the full meaning. Moreover, this exclusive attention to stable structures can entice us to succumb to the illusion of fixity, that is, the illusion that meanings are fixed, abstract entities that can float free of contexts and the ongoing flow of experience" (80).
Recall above, in reference to Wilber's excerpt G:

And we can find his dualistic nondualism again on display in page 2 of the series in his discussion of the Two Truths which he says "are of radically different orders."

Compare and contrast with Johnson in the above referenced book:

"What must be avoided...is the Kantian view that an adequate account of human mind and thought requires the keeping of two sets of books--one for the phenomenal world of things as appearances to us, and the other for the mysterious, noumenal world of things in themselves" (113).
And lest we forget, Integral Spirituality is full of the same type of metaphysical descriptions. As one example of several see Appendix II, The sliding scale of enlightenment:

“Enlightenment is a union of both Emptiness and Form, or a union of Freedom and Fullness. To realize infinite Emptiness is to be free from all finite things, free from all pain, all suffering, all limitation, all qualities—the via negativa that soars to a transcendental freedom from the known, a nirvikalpa
samadhi beyond desire and death, beyond pain and time, longing and remorse, fear and hope, a
timeless Dharmakaya of the Unborn, the great Ayin or Abyss that is free from all finite qualities whatsoever (including that one).”
GNOSIS—Divine intelligence, reason and knowledge as opposed to learned and conditioned thought. The transrational part of the individual human soul, in connection to the Supermind. The principle of the cosmic mind or soul mind, logos: as an intelligent purposive principle of the world. Philos: mind, reason, or intellect, as a metaphysical principle. Gnosis is inborn knowledge concerning the mystery of becoming. It cannot be formulated and must be realized through revelation of divine will or truth. Knowledge as truth…a form of rememberance of Epistemonikon…the higher power by which we comprehend universal propositions. Gnostic intelligence is primarily an auto-didactic force of nature a “Self Teaching" or inner-tuition arising from the void, through primary perception of the cells, and superconduction of consciousness within the bodymind. Gnosis implies the full cathartic integration of meaning, feeling, emotion and thought—it is the alive growing edge of human evolution—rather than the canned, conditioned thought accumulated from past knowledge and ideas that forms a solid abstract harddrive, which is set apart, from the flow of evolutionary meaning and purpose. the sacred, noumenal existance.

I am trying to think of a term for accumulated consciousness as opposed to the "living consciousness" that arises in dreams, revelations, gnosis, grokking, poetry, art and illuminated thought. Canned consciousness perhaps.
On Wim Borsboom's facebook this morning is this plus Eckhart quotes...

The Hindu notion of "paratman" or the "eternal soul" reminds me of Meister Eckhart's (c.1260-1327) understanding that the “divine essence” and the “human being” are non-dualistically ONE
- distinguishable but not separable -
in the supreme soul (paratman) of every human being.

For more on Meister Eckhart, the 13th century German Dominican monk, teacher, mystic and visionary: http://www.eckhartsociety.org/eckhart/his-teachings

Reply to Discussion

RSS

What paths lie ahead for religion and spirituality in the 21st Century? How might the insights of modernity and post-modernity impact and inform humanity's ancient wisdom traditions? How are we to enact, together, new spiritual visions – independently, or within our respective traditions – that can respond adequately to the challenges of our times?

This group is for anyone interested in exploring these questions and tracing out the horizons of an integral post-metaphysical spirituality.

Notice to Visitors

At the moment, this site is at full membership capacity and we are not admitting new members.  We are still getting new membership applications, however, so I am considering upgrading to the next level, which will allow for more members to join.  In the meantime, all discussions are open for viewing and we hope you will read and enjoy the content here.

© 2019   Created by Balder.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service