Introduction to TSK - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-28T12:37:56Zhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/introduction-to-tsk?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A42885&xg_source=activity&feed=yes&xn_auth=noA new summary overview of the…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-03-24:5301756:Comment:606292015-03-24T14:38:10.446ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>A new summary overview of the TSK vision has just been published: <a href="http://shop.dharmapublishing.com/products/inside-knowledge-how-to-activate-the-radical-new-vision-of-reality-of-tibetan-lama-tarthang-tulku" target="_blank">Inside Knowledge</a>. The six primary books of the TSK series can be a bit difficult to get into for some, so this looks like it might be a good general introduction.</p>
<p>A new summary overview of the TSK vision has just been published: <a href="http://shop.dharmapublishing.com/products/inside-knowledge-how-to-activate-the-radical-new-vision-of-reality-of-tibetan-lama-tarthang-tulku" target="_blank">Inside Knowledge</a>. The six primary books of the TSK series can be a bit difficult to get into for some, so this looks like it might be a good general introduction.</p> If this "line of thinking" is…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-06-19:5301756:Comment:567952014-06-19T17:26:30.758ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>If this "line of thinking" is followed far enough it does not matter whether it gets called "denial of God" or "open space for God". Both are true Names of God. Our concern must be to make sure people get as deep as possible in as healthy a manner as possible. Then Divinity looks after itself.</p>
<p><br></br> <br></br> <cite>andrew said:…</cite></p>
<p>If this "line of thinking" is followed far enough it does not matter whether it gets called "denial of God" or "open space for God". Both are true Names of God. Our concern must be to make sure people get as deep as possible in as healthy a manner as possible. Then Divinity looks after itself.</p>
<p><br/> <br/> <cite>andrew said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/introduction-to-tsk?page=2&commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A56872&x=1#5301756Comment56872"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>It depends: if one is using this line of thinking to utterly deny the existence of God, then Houston, we have a problem . If one is using this line of thinking to hold an open space for God, then this is quite acceptable, IMO! But that open space can only really be filled with love ( Agape). But in the Noah thread that love allows for the limited human choice of wrong action leading to what is called in that thread: The Left Hand Protocols. Will there ever be a resolution to The Left Hand Protocols I think I hear you ask! I don't know! lol But I sure hope so. </p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> It depends: if one is using t…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-06-19:5301756:Comment:568722014-06-19T04:42:25.895Zandrewhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/andrew
<p>It depends: if one is using this line of thinking to utterly deny the existence of God, then Houston, we have a problem . If one is using this line of thinking to hold an open space for God, then this is quite acceptable, IMO! But that open space can only really be filled with love ( Agape). But in the Noah thread that love allows for the limited human choice of wrong action leading to what is called in that thread: The Left Hand Protocols. Will there ever be a resolution to The Left Hand…</p>
<p>It depends: if one is using this line of thinking to utterly deny the existence of God, then Houston, we have a problem . If one is using this line of thinking to hold an open space for God, then this is quite acceptable, IMO! But that open space can only really be filled with love ( Agape). But in the Noah thread that love allows for the limited human choice of wrong action leading to what is called in that thread: The Left Hand Protocols. Will there ever be a resolution to The Left Hand Protocols I think I hear you ask! I don't know! lol But I sure hope so. </p> Also see Balder's blog post o…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-06-19:5301756:Comment:570032014-06-19T00:56:30.238ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>Also see Balder's blog post on some of this <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profiles/blogs/three-nows-the-future-infinitive-and-triple-loop-awareness" target="_self">here</a>, as well as some links in the comments.</p>
<p>Also see Balder's blog post on some of this <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profiles/blogs/three-nows-the-future-infinitive-and-triple-loop-awareness" target="_self">here</a>, as well as some links in the comments.</p> From Lane's IW article "Refle…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-06-19:5301756:Comment:569332014-06-19T00:43:47.918ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>From Lane's IW article "<a href="http://www.integralworld.net/lane78.html" target="_blank">Reflections on unknowingness</a>":</p>
<p>"Perhaps deep within our own hearts and minds we intuit that Reality is indeed greater than we can conceive; that God—and I am using the term to denote Absoluteness—is not something to be talked about, or theorized about, or even proven. God is that which begins and ends in the Unknowable, and thus agnosticism is closer to our own bone than we might wish to…</p>
<p>From Lane's IW article "<a href="http://www.integralworld.net/lane78.html" target="_blank">Reflections on unknowingness</a>":</p>
<p>"Perhaps deep within our own hearts and minds we intuit that Reality is indeed greater than we can conceive; that God—and I am using the term to denote Absoluteness—is not something to be talked about, or theorized about, or even proven. God is that which begins and ends in the Unknowable, and thus agnosticism is closer to our own bone than we might wish to admit. We really don't know, do we? Maybe what makes Faqir Chand 's confession of ignorance so appealing and so believable is that he is stating a universal fact—a fact which is evident to every human being who has ever lived: we simply don't know the why of our own existence, much less the reason behind the universe. And this unknowingness may not be a cultural product at all, but rather an inherent, even biological, response to the very wonder of the cosmos."</p>
<p>"Faqir Chand can be regarded as an enlightened being in the sense that he came to grips with the Unknowable. Not by super imposing order or meaning upon that Mystery, but rather by surrendering to its transformative implications: <em>Transcendental Unknowingness creates natural humility and an inherent openness to the vagaries of Being.</em>"</p> Would Faber's in/difference q…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-06-17:5301756:Comment:566962014-06-17T16:12:37.918ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>Would <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/states-stages-the-wc-lattice-and-the-fold?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A52683" target="_self">Faber's in/difference</a> qualify for TSK's 4th stage and MOA-3? Also see the post following it quoting Faber. The link is to Keller on Faber. Several posts following that there is a discussion of its implications.</p>
<p>Would <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/states-stages-the-wc-lattice-and-the-fold?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A52683" target="_self">Faber's in/difference</a> qualify for TSK's 4th stage and MOA-3? Also see the post following it quoting Faber. The link is to Keller on Faber. Several posts following that there is a discussion of its implications.</p> Michael - thanks. That's a n…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-06-17:5301756:Comment:568632014-06-17T05:34:54.402ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Michael - thanks. That's a nice way to frame it. My Lovecraftian exclamation above was as much directed at your post as at Layman's, by the way. <br></br><br></br>Layman, I'm glad you stepped in with your MOA framing. In my response to theurj, I had considered using some of your MOA language but held back ... but it's clear that that's a good way to read what Tarthang Tulku is suggesting with these stages: the stepwise drawing adjacent of knowing and unknowing into (intimate) nondual…</p>
<p>Michael - thanks. That's a nice way to frame it. My Lovecraftian exclamation above was as much directed at your post as at Layman's, by the way. <br/><br/>Layman, I'm glad you stepped in with your MOA framing. In my response to theurj, I had considered using some of your MOA language but held back ... but it's clear that that's a good way to read what Tarthang Tulku is suggesting with these stages: the stepwise drawing adjacent of knowing and unknowing into (intimate) nondual in/distiction.</p> Aye, ftaghn!Dead Cthulhu wait…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-06-17:5301756:Comment:569202014-06-17T03:25:50.670ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Aye, ftaghn!<br/><br/>Dead Cthulhu waits dreaming, etc...<br/><br/>It is true! Right now in the eldritch house of R'lyeh, right here and still so hard to fathom, the long dead are yet dreaming -- this is the tri-fold dance of nuclear time.<br/><br/></p>
<p>Aye, ftaghn!<br/><br/>Dead Cthulhu waits dreaming, etc...<br/><br/>It is true! Right now in the eldritch house of R'lyeh, right here and still so hard to fathom, the long dead are yet dreaming -- this is the tri-fold dance of nuclear time.<br/><br/></p> So here's how these four "tra…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-06-16:5301756:Comment:567762014-06-16T18:58:03.795ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>So here's how these four "transitional stages" sound to the Metaphysics of Adjacency:</p>
<p></p>
<p>FIRSTLY,</p>
<p>The whole "first tier" of human history may be called MOSP civilization -- dominated by the Metaphysics of Simple Presence. Everything is basically assumed to be as it is given to the ordinary mind and senses. This includes KNOWING and NOT-KNOWING. They are straightforward. They are simple presences but they are not symmetrical. There are more things known and unknown. …</p>
<p>So here's how these four "transitional stages" sound to the Metaphysics of Adjacency:</p>
<p></p>
<p>FIRSTLY,</p>
<p>The whole "first tier" of human history may be called MOSP civilization -- dominated by the Metaphysics of Simple Presence. Everything is basically assumed to be as it is given to the ordinary mind and senses. This includes KNOWING and NOT-KNOWING. They are straightforward. They are simple presences but they are not symmetrical. There are more things known and unknown. This is a world of various kinds of learnable knowledge. There is a vast open space and we can explore it. We make fire or light bulbs in the darkness of night. We enter something into the blank subject line of emails. We look to see what is going on.</p>
<p></p>
<p>SECONDLY</p>
<p>The first style of Metaphysics of Adjacency (MOA-1) is readily associated with quantum and relativistic physics. The former uses probability to make discrete practical use of specific unknowns. The latter reveals that each perspective fails to encompass the whole of Reality. We are authentic when we understand the form of our finitude. A pluralism of ways exist in which each of us are limited by the unknown nature of reality. And this requires CONSCIOUSLY OPEN-ENDED thinking. We start to say, "How you really know that?" and "That's just your opinion, man." The specific knowing of the unknown has entered into our thinking.</p>
<p>THIRDLY,</p>
<p>At MOA-2 levels we begin the conversion of this reality (which is riddled with the Unknown, per se) into a new form form of knowing. The utility of absence becomes the basis of our new constructions. A meta-understanding becomes conceivable. There is a convergence, or structural mutuality and coherence, of the plurality. Open-ended thinking becomes an architecture. Under these conditions the existence and challenge of "another opinion" no longer poses an incommensurable obstacle to the viability of knowing. Knowing incorporates knowledge of unknowingness.</p>
<p>FOURTHLY,</p>
<p>At MOA-3 levels we begin to dabble in nondual logistics. Knowing and Unknowing can not longer be thought of as either the "same" or "different" because sameness and difference are indistinct. Un/knowing is same-different. They are both compressed maximally into their own edge. We are contemplating thoughtlessly but in a way that connects with thinking. Trans-thought is now available. It is EXACTLY ONLY its known unknowness and unknown knownness with no possible alternative for learning any more or remaining limited with current knowledge. Being and becoming of knowledge are impossible to think apart from each other. Declaring that they are identical even implies more contrast than is legitimate.</p>
<p></p>
<p>FTAGHN!</p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p> </p> Bruce,
Thanks for presenting…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-06-16:5301756:Comment:568502014-06-16T01:06:03.227ZMichael Grayhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/MichaelGray
<p>Bruce,</p>
<p>Thanks for presenting the four stages through which we can see an intimate relationship between the known and the unknown. As you know I was there for your presentation but still needed your careful written analysis in order to glimpse how it might be possible to draw upon the infinite and fertile field of the unknown. Perhaps this affinity is more readily glimpsed in the relationship between a "known" past (active in the present), and an "unknown" future that resides in a…</p>
<p>Bruce,</p>
<p>Thanks for presenting the four stages through which we can see an intimate relationship between the known and the unknown. As you know I was there for your presentation but still needed your careful written analysis in order to glimpse how it might be possible to draw upon the infinite and fertile field of the unknown. Perhaps this affinity is more readily glimpsed in the relationship between a "known" past (active in the present), and an "unknown" future that resides in a realm of infinite possibilities. There it seems we can shift our relationship to the future--from the anxiety and dread that try to make the future "known"--to an appreciation of the fact that the "unknown" of the future carries all possibilites and is free to manifest any dream. And perhaps the way to do that is to appreciate an unknown (present across the three times) that is not separated from a "known" that we may cling to in a tiny present moment</p>