color confusion....

[andrew]

hey folks, i'm in need of your help, so i come to the pub offering a virtual beer to anyone who can clarify my integral confusions:) i know i'm in the right place....

first off, i hope your all doing well since the move from gaialand.........

so here goes: page 106 in i.s., kenny is saying that there has been a downward transition from indigo to green when it comes to the sutras and such. this confuses me to no end. now i know that he's saying that the 2500 year old sage was at the indigo stage in the cognitive line, but something still doesn't sit right with me here and i'm just not getting it. first off, i thought sdi was zone 2 stages and i just can't see a couple of sages 2500 years ago buzzing around in beamers and writing quantum equations on chalkboards, while discussing the complexities of all the world cultures and the effect their having on the global eco systems,etc....

okay, so say the amber sage (has to be,right?), has had an amazing non-dual realization, well, he's still an amber sage with a non dual realization, no? or can one color code the non-dual? or was the amber sage not an amber sage at all but a being from a planetary loka who would giggle at our most complex quantum equations and one who had immense precog skills that he could see prior all the sdi stages to come................

okay, i guess i'm just really hung up on this color coding when it crosses from zone 2 to zone 1....am i alone in this confusion? help!lol

[rltruthseeker]

[Balder]

Hi, RL, I don't think the example you pointed out is a contradiction. I think he's saying you need to be at turquoise to 'perceive' or conceive of 'ecosystem' (as we understand it), but he's not saying that you have to believe in or perceive 'ecosystems' to be turquoise. However, if you look at the complexly nested, interdependent self-world order described in Hua Yen, it has the 'contours' of ecosystemic understanding, 'fleshed out' in mythical garb.

[rltruthseeker]

Yeah. I will look at the Hua Yen link. I haven't seen that before and I appreciate it. I'm just mad about Integral Spirituality. :(

...but I think the "FULL" nature of his vertical scheme, in which people have to know "everything" about the world of form (an impossibility) and he renders the "Free" aspect as a mere translation (the Wilber-Combs lattice with subtle, causual, nondual as merely "horizontal) doesn't really work. I think nondual is only sustainable in third tier.

And he also lump sums Spirituality with Metaphysics (having everything be "Intra-Physical"), in the result that, to use one of his own phrases, "throws the baby out with the bathwater."

[andrew]

now your really getting into the heart of the matter with my questions rl! thx. my whole point was that as you pointed out, red and amber don't see eco-systems so how were these ancient folks writing indigo? and i agree, under the new matrix lattice, something simply (:)) doesn't jive....as you pointed out, and i agree.....

i have to be honest here bruce! at first, because this is the pub, i thought that you might be having a little fun with me in linking that sutra as high indigo knowledge! you must be aware that the text reads literally as completely metaphysical and sounds like traditional hinduism. however, having thought about that today, would you say that the difference between purple/magic and indigo, is that indigo understands the text are not literal, whereas purple/amber, takes this stuff to be literally true! in which case, s. hawkings, needs to add a new chapter to his book- gluons and mesons are the workings of invisible light beings called deva's....and the black hole's-you guessed it- the creation of the asura's:)

[Balder]

Yes, it is a tour de force of metaphysical imagery -- purposefully over the top, as I read it.

I do not think Wilber is basing his assessment on its surface content (which, as I said, deliberately delights in mythical imagery); rather, I think he sees it as a (post)-vision-logic sort of display, in terms of the complexity of its structure and what we might call (in Gebser's terms) its temporal diaphaneity.

As for the reliance of this text on myth, you might check out Hokai's article on the place of myth in Buddhist history.

[xibalba]

what´s your opinion of Da today herr Jung?