Q. We now come to higher levels, which
we will deal with in more detail. You seem to be of the opinion that the
treatment of these levels in many ways has been unsatisfactory. Why is this?
PC In contemporary psychology these levels are
largely ignored with the centaur (H0) the most advanced stage that is properly
recognised.
However though it is certainly true that the higher
levels are dealt with in great depth by the esoteric mystical traditions,
invariably the focus is from a purely spiritual perspective (that is often
clothed in the particular language and symbols of the religious tradition from
which it emanates).
In other words I have found it very difficult, if
not impossible, to find any coherent treatment of the advanced stages dealing
properly with the cognitive and affective - as opposed to merely spiritual -
features of development.
Therefore even when the importance of these stages
is fully recognised, in intellectual accounts of development a clear
discontinuity is evident whereby the more advanced are not properly
incorporated with earlier stages.
I would see my approach - despite its
many limitations - as motivated from the onset by a distinct perspective i.e.
to properly show in an appropriate intellectual manner how all the stages of
development are fundamentally related to each other.
My main contribution is then in the demonstration
of how the nature of these stage structures is inherently mathematical in a
holistic integral sense.
Q. You would also maintain that your account is
experiential rather than research-based? Can you elaborate a little?
PC Though I do not question the great
benefits of detailed research of the lives and accounts of others, in the end
this is second-hand and no substitute for direct experience. This is especially
so when one is attempting to bring a new perspective to the actual experience
of more advanced levels.
Thus though I was brought up in a specific
religious tradition (Roman Catholic) with its own distinctive images and
symbols for conveying spiritual truths, I would see these (and likewise those
of other traditions) as largely representative of secondary rather than primary
structures.
Put another way I have been searching for a more
universal scientific language to express what is essential with respect to
metaphysical - and physical - structure (especially with respect to the stages
of more advanced spiritual development).
Of course such truth can never be directly
expressed through the medium of language (scientific or otherwise). However,
because Spirit is necessarily mediated through phenomena, an appropriate means
of indirect cognitive translation remains a vitally important task as a helpful
catalyst for authentic spiritual development.
Q. You also maintain that it is especially
necessary at the higher levels to portray development with respect to the
affective, cognitive and volitional modes. Why is this?
PC We will deal in more detail with the modes of
development later on. Suffice it to say at this point that appropriate
development with respect to the primary modes i.e. affective, cognitive and
volitional is vital in terms of true spiritual integration. As these are
related to each other through various types of complementarity, ultimately it
is not possibly to successfully integrate one mode without corresponding
integration with respect to the others.
Q. Are you implying that this is not
true of the earlier bands i.e. lower and middle?
PC The earlier bands are concerned primarily with
the successful unfolding of the personal ego. The emphasis here is on the
differentiation rather than the integration of structures. So the middle levels
culminate with the specialised development of (discrete) linear understanding.
Though a degree of integration must also necessarily take place, in the society
that we live in this is typically of a somewhat reduced nature with experience
becoming fragmented in many ways.
In this context it is quite possible - and even
typical - for the primary modes to develop at very different rates. We all
encounter in our everyday lives people who are feeling, thinking or
conscientious type personalities (corresponding to the affective, cognitive and
volitional modes respectively). So, uneven development here can easily lead to
the most developed mode tending to dominate experience.
However with advancing spiritual awareness, such
uneven development becomes much more difficult to sustain so that considerable
attention must be given to all modes.
H1
(Higher 1) - Subtle
Q. What are they key dynamics that lead to the
unfolding of H1?
PC Though we should realise that there
are a variety of ways of entering this stage, very often it is preceded by a
profound and lengthy existential crisis.
Typically one - on the threshold of an
apparently successful future - begins to experience a growing feeling of
restlessness and futility, accompanied by a desire for a deeper meaning not
found in everyday pursuits.
This can be an extremely trying time. One
may for a time attempt to obey the strong pressure to fit in with conventional
expectations. However if the spiritual experience is truly authentic this will
not bring any real peace. So for a
considerable period of time one may feel cut adrift and isolated with no clear
sense of an alternative direction.
Though, from the conscious linear
perspective this has all the appearance of regression and loss with respect to
past achievements, in truth it represents the first necessary deepening of the
unconscious aspect of personality considerably neglected in the development of
previous stages.
When the conscious aspect develops in the
absence of the corresponding unconscious aspect, it is associated with a rigid
form of dualism whereby one becomes possessively attached to the phenomenal
forms that arise in experience.
Though the root cause is spiritual
(residing in the will) it is always associated with cognitive (and affective)
confusion that is fundamentally based on an arbitrary interpretation of polar
reference frames in experience.
In other words with rigid dualism one
always posits one polar frame as valid (without recognition that interpretation
from the opposite frame is equally valid).
Once again if one walks up a road in a
particular direction right and left turns have clear unambiguous meanings. Thus
in the context of this reference frame as valid one unambiguously can posit
what is right or left. However one could equally walk down the same road in the
opposite direction where again in the context of this (opposite) reference
frame one can unambiguously posit what is right or left.
However when considered simultaneously
(as interdependent), interpretations in terms of both frames is now rendered
paradoxical. So what is a right turn in terms of the first is a left in terms
of the second; likewise what is left in terms of the first is right in terms of
the second.
However in order to recognise - in any
context - the second polar reference frame as valid, we must negate the
(unambiguous) interpretation associated with the first (that has already been
posited).
However it is in the very nature of
conscious development (of the middle levels
that interpretation is largely based - in any given context - on the
positing of just one reference frame. This then gives interpretation (within
this chosen frame) an unambiguous absolute quality. Not surprisingly one then
keeps assenting volitionally to the “rightness” of such interpretations leading
to consequent rigid phenomenal attachment.
Q.
So presumably what you are implying is that the undeveloped volitional sense
(whereby we are unable to initially identify true meaning with ineffable
Spirit) leads to the need to seek meaning in a rigid dualistic phenomenal
manner (which always fundamentally entails an arbitrary choice of polar
reference frames). And it is in the very
nature of such meaning that it appears to unambiguously confirm absolute
(phenomenal) notions of truth. This then leads further to the volitional assent
to such meaning. So in becoming blinded by the “false” light (associated with
rigid phenomenal forms) we find it more difficult to see the “true” light of
Spirit?
PC Yes! That’s just about it! However we
could qualify this by saying that the unambiguous meaning associated with
phenomenal forms relates solely to conscious notions of truth. Therefore where
the unconscious maintains an appropriate degree of freedom, this can lead to a
significant conflict as between alternative notions of meaning. In other words,
whereas at the conscious level one may be seeking unambiguous meaning
(associated with the arbitrary dualistic interpretation of form) at a deeper
unconscious level one may still be vaguely seeking a more holistic mysterious
meaning that is ultimately spiritual.
Q
So presumably if one is to truly progress to the full unfolding of H1, this
conflict as between conscious and unconscious notions of meaning must be
especially severe?
PC Indeed! Proper development of the
unconscious requires the ability to achieve true integration of (opposite)
polar reference frames (e.g. internal and external). However because conscious
meaning has been hitherto based on the arbitrary positing of meaning associated
- in any context - with just one frame, there is now a growing need for dynamic
negation (of what has been already posited).
So this can lead to a deep existential
crisis where all meaning associated with former phenomenal activities and
achievements, is substantially lost. Thus while one vaguely desires a more
profound spiritual meaning, because of undue attachment to form, one is
consciously aware only of such loss.
However - assuming that the process is
truly authentic - at the deeper level of personality, the Spirit incubates in a
hidden manner in the unconscious until sufficient refinement of personality
takes place.
Q.
And can we say how long this cleansing will require?
PC Not really! A lot depends on
individual circumstances. Some who are destined for significant degree of
mystical type awareness may require a long and severe period of purgation. With
others gaining just limited access to H1, the process may be hardly noticeable.
Q.
And how is this situation resolved?
PC Again it can happen in a variety of
ways. However we usually find associated with the more advanced type of
development an initial outpouring of spiritual illumination that has a
significant transforming effect on personality.
In other words when sufficient refinement
of personality takes place (to support one’s emerging spiritual identity) the
Spirit, which had incubated for a time in the darkness of the unconscious is
now revealed in conscious form as light (whereby it transforms the nature of
phenomena with which it is associated).
Q.
As we are now dealing with the parallel development of the three modes
affective, cognitive and volitional can you briefly express how each manifests
itself at this stage?
PC Very often the affective mode is the
first to display itself after illumination whereby nature becomes bathed in a
new spiritual light.
To properly understand what is at work
here, let us illustrate with reference to the experience of a flower such as a
rose.
At the previous stage, though one of
course could admire the beauty of the rose one essentially tends to view it
“out there” as part of the external natural environment.
In other words in the standard dualistic
manner one posits the rose with respect to just one arbitrary frame of
reference (i.e. external).
However at H1, a much more refined
appreciation becomes available. Because substantial dynamic negation has taken
place, one now posits phenomena in a subtler manner (which allows equally for
positing of the neglected pole). In other words one now experiences the rose
with respect to both its external and internal aspects. In effect this means
that one is not just observing but rather engaging directly as a co-creator of
nature.
So in the new refined spiritual
experience we have an intimate dialogue of shared meaning. One can now clearly
intuit the shared spiritual basis of both self and the rose in this personal
dialogue. Therefore through this interaction one is given life as it were by
the flower (in the realisation of its spiritual origin) and likewise gives life
to the flower (through the reciprocal recognition of the spiritual origin of
one’s own life).
Thus in this continual interaction we
have a positing of the rose (through negation of self) and then the positing of
self (through negation of the rose). So in the most deeply contemplative
experience of nature there is no hierarchy but rather truly equal partners in
the shared life of the Spirit.
Q.
How do you reconcile this view with the hierarchical notion of matter, mind and
Spirit? Surely from this perspective a human being cannot have a meaningful
relationship with a plant?
PC We have already seen - in the context
of our discussion of pre and trans - how hierarchical relationships can only
have a certain limited validity within a differentiated (dualistic)
context. However from a proper integral
(nondual) perspective, all such hierarchies are seen as paradoxical. Therefore
in the true nondual contemplative sense when one deeply experiences nature,
there is no hierarchy but rather an awareness of Spirit, which mutually
sustains both partners in an intimate shared dialogue.
Q.
And this is not pantheism?
PC Not necessarily! Pantheism would be
associated with a somewhat unbalanced experience where the immanent aspect (of
Spirit within nature) is affirmed to the exclusion of the equally valid
transcendent aspect (of Spirit - literally - without natural phenomena).
Ultimately both these aspects are fully interdependent in the true identity of
form and emptiness (and emptiness and form).
Q.
So it is possible then to have as deep a relationship with nature than with a
human - say - one’s marriage partner.
PC Indeed perhaps deeper in some
cases! I would honestly say that my most
profound spiritual moments have often been experienced “alone” with nature. And
I believe this is true for many others also! In fact, at these moments, one
feels least alone in the deep awareness of a common shared origin (and destiny)
as Spirit.
Of course human involvement is also
desirable and necessary (perhaps even to experience such moments) but that is
another issue.
The point is that in some contexts
hierarchical distinctions have validity and in others they do not! And we must
always remain aware of this important truth.
Q.
What you are saying would imply that natural phenomena are as much personal as
impersonal. However science tends to view nature in inanimate - merely
impersonal - terms. Is this not a problem?
PC You are right! It is an enormous
problem! I would accept of course that science should be primarily based on a
cognitive mode of interpretation. However a proper cognitive interpretation
should still take account of both the personal and impersonal aspects of
phenomena. So an account, which treats such phenomena in a merely impersonal
manner, is necessarily reduced.
In other words we need a distinctive type
of holistic science at the higher levels.
Q.
Are there other ways in which the affective mode expresses itself at this
stage?
PC The affective can be evoked through
very close - perhaps romantic - personal relationships. The feelings aroused in
such relationships tend to grow into refined affective expressions of the
Spirit with the senses becoming denuded of material content. Indeed in their
most holistic expressions, affective symbols can serve as direct transparent
archetypes of the Spirit where they radiate pure feelings of joy.
One must remember however that we are
dealing here merely with the default experience of the stage (when H1 initially
unfolds). However enhanced experience of the stage can become available from
the perspective of any of the more advanced levels of development.
Q.
So nature mysticism is not just associated with H1?
PC Indeed not! Once again this would
suggest a merely hierarchical way of viewing stages. Whereas it is true that
the early phases of H1 (sometimes referred to as the psychic realm) is indeed
often associated with an initial flowering of nature mysticism, a more enhanced
spiritual appreciation of natural symbols can become available from the
standpoint of later (more refined) stages.
Q.
Is the experience of this stage all sweetness and light?
PC Though a honeymoon period may follow
the initial outpouring of illumination announcing the stage, this is unlikely
to last for very long. The problem is that the pure light, which initially
shines forth uncontaminated by phenomenal form, gradually leads to increasing
conflict, revealing deeper layers of possessive attachment to such forms.
Though primary attachment to the conscious sense symbols of experience may have
been substantially eroded, deeper secondary attachment to these symbols (as
mediators of Spirit) is likely to become a growing problem. For example the
natural tendency to judge that one’s spiritual life is going well when bathed
by light and going badly when suffering interior conflict and darkness reveals
secondary attachment.
So illumination (that becomes associated
with such attachment) gradually turns to purgation (where once again dynamic
negation with respect to associated phenomena takes place).
Q.
So this is the dark night of the soul?
PC Using the language of St. John
Q.
What about the cognitive aspect! How does this manifest itself at H1?
PC We saw earlier at the middle levels
how the mature development of (linear) reason unfolds at the formop stage. The
generalising ability of abstract reason however requires considerable
detachment from the more localised empirical content of the earlier conop
stage.
There are parallels here also at H1. In
other words for the full expression of the cognitive intellectual capacity of
H1 (associated with paradoxical circular type interpretation) one must become
considerably detached from more localised sense expressions of such
understanding. And it is the dynamic negation of secondary spiritual attachment
to sense symbols (i.e. the passive night of sense) that brings about this
detachment.
So this new expression of cognitive
understanding can likewise be associated with an initial period of purer
spiritual illumination. Here the deeper structure of reality can be directly
revealed to the intellect through peak moments of brilliant intuitive insight.
This then leads to the refined rational attempt - through paradoxical type
relationships - to properly accommodate this insight to the intellect.
Q.
And presumably this is the genesis of what you are chiefly concerned with in
this account i.e. a properly holistic – as opposed to merely analytic –
scientific interpretation of development. Did this become clear to you in a
peak moment of spiritual inspiration?
PC Precisely! I remember this key moment
well as I sat quietly in a University library in Dublin
Q.
We will return more fully to the mathematical rationale of your intellectual
vision in a later discussion. However can you briefly express the key point
here?
PC The basic point i.e. that at a
fundamental level all reality is conditioned by the complementary interaction
of polar opposites is not new. It is inherent in a great many mystical accounts
and forms a key aspect of Taoism. It is also inherent in quantum mechanics and
the work of different Western thinkers such as Heraclitus, Nicholas of Cusa,
Hegel and Jung. However what I believe is new is proper clarification of the
different types of complementary opposite relationships that exist (and then
the linking up of this understanding to fundamental holistic mathematical
notions).
It is the first type of complementary
opposite relationship - which I refer to as Type 1 - that unfolds in experience
at H1. Properly speaking this relates to the fact that what we view, in any
appropriate context, as opposites in real (conscious) terms, from a dynamic
interactive perspective, bear a paradoxical complementary relationship with
each other.
So when we grasp the implications of this
statement, it turns dualistic understanding on its head for such understanding
is always based on the unambiguous designation of such opposites.
For example if I draw a vertical line on
a page, in dualistic terms the upward direction of the line can be easily
pointed out. However if we now rotate the page through 180 degrees, the
situation is reversed so what was up (in terms of the first designation) is now
down and what was down (in terms of the first designation) is now up.
The crucial point is that in dynamic
experiential terms, polar opposite positions keep switching (with no way of
unambiguously defining which is which). It is only when we attempt to take a
static freeze-frame of the situation (as it were) that location appears
unambiguous.
Basically in experience we always
differentiate by taking discrete static frames of reality (where opposite poles
can be unambiguously identified). However we integrate through making these
frames dynamically continuous in experience (where opposites have no clear
meaning).
Thus whereas the middle levels are
concerned with the specialisation of linear understanding (for static
differentiation of reality) the higher levels are properly concerned with the
specialised unfolding of circular paradoxical understanding (for corresponding
dynamic integration of reality).
Q.
Again briefly how would you distinguish a H1 (subtle) interpretation of the
levels of development from a H0 (vision-logic) interpretation?
PC Though the vision-logic interpretation
may well be implicitly fuelled by much creative spiritual insight, in formal
terms it is largely based on the unambiguous interpretation of asymmetrical
relationships.
So using the ladder analogy to portray
levels, the direction “up” on this ladder is considered unambiguous. Therefore
the levels are basically assumed to move unambiguously upwards from the first
prepersonal to the final transpersonal stage along this ladder.
However a H1 interpretation is much
subtler. Here it is clearly recognised that in dynamic experiential terms what
is “up” can be taken in two directions (that are directly opposite in terms of
each other). In other words because polar reference frames keep dynamically
switching what is “up” and what is “down” likewise keep switching. Thus what is
“up” in terms of one frame is “down” in terms of the other; likewise what is
“down” in terms of one frame is “up” in terms of the other.
Thus from a static differentiated
perspective, we operate with two self-consistent asymmetrical stage models.
However from the dynamic integral perspective we recognise that these opposites
are truly complementary (and ultimately identical). So it is this complementary
recognition of opposites that is the real hallmark of H1 intellectual
understanding. Though this recognition is directly of a formless intuitive
nature, indirectly it has a coherent cognitive expression (in terms of form).
However it is necessarily associated with a more refined asymmetrical
vision-logic interpretation of stages (based on two distinct reference frames).
We will show more fully – in our later
discussion on stages of self(hood) and stages of reality – the true
significance of this H1 formulation.
Q.
Presumably you are saying here that the default intellectual understanding of
H1, where the paradoxical complementary nature of opposite poles properly
unfolds, is associated with an enhanced appreciation of H0 (where asymmetrical
relationships with respect to two self-consistent frames are used)?
PC That’s it is a nutshell! From a true
integral perspective we always keep returning from “higher” to “lower” (and in
reverse from “lower” to “higher”) stages with a new enhanced appreciation
throughout development.
Q.
Why in turn does this new cognitive appreciation lead to severe conflicts in
the personality?
PC Though the ego operates in a more
refined manner at H1, it certainly is not dead. So possessive attachment is
largely transferred from the linear to the circular appreciation of phenomena!
As personality identity - especially male - is so often associated with the
cognitive aspect, such attachment can lead to a strong clash with the pure spiritual
intuition (of which the intellectual symbols are but a secondary
representation). This leads in turn to a newer more prolonged form of purgation
or cleansing whereby this deep-rooted cognitive attachment is dynamically
negated.
Q.
Though we are still at H1, you seem to be identifying the mystical “dark night”
with this level. What about more advanced levels?
PC One of the problems with Christian mysticism
is that no clear distinction is made as between the conscious and unconscious
regions of the personality.
Though of course they are interrelated in
many ways, in my account H1 relates directly to the conscious aspect, H2 to the
unconscious, and H3 to the centre (i.e. will) that connects both conscious and
unconscious.
However where these aspects are not
distinguished, these three levels tend to become merged in various respects
into one.
In Eastern mysticism there is indeed a
far clearer delineation of higher stages from the perspective of spiritual
states. However I cannot find equal emphasis there on the complementary aspect
of phenomenal structures of form. So in a necessarily limited way I am
attempting to fill gaps, which I have found in terms of both Western and
Eastern accounts.
Q.
Why do you concentrate so much on the mystical writings of St. John
PC Good question! Personally I have been
most influenced by the writings of St.
John
Some time later however it struck me that
St. John’s account is really representative of a particular personality type
(and even then an extreme example with respect to that type). Indeed many of
the intellectual figures who influenced me greatly at various stages of
development – Einstein, Kierkegaard, Hegel, and Jung fall into the same
personality grouping. In Enneagram terms this would represent a complex mix of
the 4 and 5 types. The 4 tends to have a very intensive experience with respect
to the affective aspect (internally) while the 5 specialises in a detached
cognitive appreciation of reality (externally).
There can be special problems in terms of
integrating these very opposite features that are inherent in the personality.
Indeed in the well-known Enneagram diagram there is an empty gap as between the
4 and 5 signifying - perhaps – a true journey in faith is necessary before
integration of this complex personality type can take place.
So the Dark Night of the Soul, in the
manner of St. John’s
Then, because the holistic mathematical
account of - that I am offering - is very much an expression of this complex
type, it is appropriate that I discuss the stages of development from that
particular perspective. Of course I recognise that such an account would not be
typical – or even helpful – for many others. However in the context of
understanding Holistic Mathematics, it is however especially relevant.
Q.
We have dealt briefly with the affective and cognitive mode. What about the
volitional mode?
PC This indeed is perhaps the most
important mode.
When life begins the first blind desire
for meaning is expressed through the will. And spiritual union ultimately
depends on will in the pure desire for God.
However throughout development an
important two-way interaction exists as between volition and the other primary
modes (affective and cognitive).
The nature of volition influences the
manner in which affective and cognitive operate. In turn this operation of the
two modes influences the nature of volition.
The task of integration is therefore to
harmonise all three modes.
Volition is most closely related with the
moral aspect of experience and at H1 we have already the refined attempt to
integrate cognitive and affective aspects in decision-making.
The cognitive approach to morality is
expressed through conformity to ideal standards that are often objectively
defined e.g. by religious authorities.
The affective approach is based more on
emotional considerations i.e. in doing what personally feels right.
Now either of these in isolation suffers
from limitations with the former in danger of becoming too rigid and impersonal
with the latter too pragmatic and self-oriented.
In a balanced approach true moral
decisions are based on a spiritual type of discernment. This takes account - in
any context - of both personal (affective) and impersonal (cognitive) criteria.
The crucial choice is then based on a refined form of spiritual intuition
guiding conscience to do what seems most appropriate in the circumstances.
As true volition in the continual desire
for Spirit is so central, considerable store can be placed on conscientious
decision-making during H1 (especially during the more trying “dark night”
stages).
Indeed this can lead to a very subtle
problem. With attachment to conscious symbols of both an affective and
cognitive kind substantially eroded, remaining ego desires can be substantially
transferred to the area of moral decisions. In other words in always seeking to
do “what is right” (confirmed through the refined intuitive signals of
conscience) one unconsciously looks for the security of knowing that – whatever
the difficulties – one at least is following the correct spiritual path. Indeed
it is quite common to suffer from considerable moral scruples at this time.
However, ultimately dynamic negation must also take place with respect to
volitional (as well as affective and cognitive) symbols. This means that in the
depth of the night of spirit one is finally left without any sense of spiritual
direction and required to journey purely in faith. And - with all natural
signals suggesting that one is lost - this can be the most terrifying of all
experiences during this time.
Q.
So the “passive night of spirit” to use St.
John’s
PC In some places St. John
Q.
Let’s talk now about complementarity. What is the nature of complementarity at
H1?
PC Remember we discussed the three
fundamental sets of polarities! So we had the horizontal polarities (internal
and external) that worked within each level, the vertical polarities (whole and
part) that work between levels and finally diagonal polarities (form and
emptiness) that work simultaneously within and between levels.
H1 is mainly concerned with Type 1
Complementarity in the mature integration of the complementary opposite poles
(internal and external) that operate horizontally within each level. (Type 1
complementarity relates to direct opposites in experience that geometrically
are at an angle of 1800 with respect to each other. This relates in
turn to opposites that are experienced in direct conscious terms)
So, on the one hand, there is a
substantial growth in contemplative nondual awareness (as emptiness) and on the
other appreciation of the paradoxical interdependent relationship of these horizontal
polarities (as phenomenal form).
However because horizontal, vertical and
diagonal polarities are ultimately complementary, the very attempt to reconcile
experience horizontally (i.e. within H1) becomes associated with a vertical
connection as between H1 and L1.
Indeed this explains very well the
disconcerting nature of purgation when initially endured. During the
illuminative phases one feels as if one is progressing well in the spiritual
life. However during the following purgative phases, one feels as if one is
regressing back to much earlier stages with all sorts of faults and
imperfections now surfacing in intense fashion (than one had thought had been
long since dealt with). So the very cyclical nature of illumination and
purgation calls deeply into question the hierarchical view of stage growth.
Thus H1 (subtle) is especially
complementary in dynamic terms with the L1 (mythic) level. So in revisiting L1
(from H1) an enhanced appreciation of the myths - for example through which the
great mysteries of so many religious traditions are conveyed - can be obtained.
In other words while still recognising the spiritual power of such myths one
can divest them of an unduly literal interpretation. Likewise in then
revisiting H1 (from the standpoint of L1) one can in turn obtain an enhanced
appreciation of this level where immanent and transcendent aspects of Spirit
are more closely associated.
Q.
Why finally is development at H1 not sufficient to achieve full integration?
PC The key problem throughout is that one
attempts to integrate the conscious polarities (in nondual fashion) without
however sufficient supporting development in the related unconscious aspect. So
in the end the unconscious is still too weak to support the task, which the
advancing spiritual personality has set itself. Indeed because of the major
psychological demands that are made especially during the deeper “dark night”
periods, considerable repression of unconscious instincts can take place. So a
severe problem of depression - that often accompanies a prolonged “dark night”
episode - can in considerable part be caused by significant repression of
unconscious instincts. This would equally indicate an unduly transcendent focus
in terms of spiritual direction at this time (without proper recognition of the
equally important immanent aspect).
Q
And you would believe that the hierarchical delineation of stages (with an
emphasis on upward transcendence) could in itself be a major contributory
factor in this unbalanced approach to growth?
PC Precisely!
Q. So what is the structural nature of H1?
PC H1
(subtle) complements L1 (mythic). L1 starts from a situation where confused
complementarity exists with respect to all three polarities (diagonal, vertical
and horizontal), before gradually moving towards differentiation with respect
to the diagonal.
H1
concludes - in reverse complementary fashion - with the situation where mature
complementary integration has been achieved with respect to horizontal
polarities with however linear differentiation still existing with respect to
both vertical and diagonal polarities.
H2
(Higher 2) - Causal
Q. We now move on to the second of
the higher levels. You believe that – especially with respect to this stage -
that you can treat it an original manner, which can better clarify its true
nature. How can this be? Surely the features of this level have been outlined
in great depth by the esoteric mystical traditions!
PC
Indeed! However As I have already stated, in terms of my own experience, I have
found fundamental flaws with respect to the treatment of this level in both
Western and Eastern mystical accounts.
In
the Western tradition, I would see a failure to properly distinguish the
conscious from the unconscious aspect of experience. For example if we take St.
John – who is one of the clearest exponents – he does not formally distinguish
as between the “night of sense” that characterises the erosion of directly
conscious symbols and that which relates to the corresponding deep-rooted erosion
of unconscious symbols that are temporarily projected into consciousness. Now
the importance of this distinction lies in the fact that whereas directly
conscious sense symbols are the first to be substantially negated in
experience, their unconscious counterparts are generally the last - and most
difficult - to erode.
Thus
the failure to distinguish conscious and unconscious aspects in this sense
leads to a corresponding failure to properly distinguish the subtle (H1) from
the causal (H2) levels. Indeed we really have three levels, which need to be
distinguished:
H1
(subtle) relates directly to spiritual illumination and purgation of conscious
type symbols i.e. in the intuitively inspired paradoxical appreciation of
phenomena.
H2
(causal) relates directly to spiritual illumination and purgation of
unconscious type symbols (that are indirectly projected briefly into experience
in conscious form).
Using
the language of physics the first relates to real, whereas the second relates
to virtual type phenomena respectively!
Using
the language of (holistic) mathematics the first again relates to real whereas
the second relates to imaginary type quantities (and qualities) respectively!
H3
(nondual) relates directly to the central relationship as between conscious and
unconscious (as Spirit). So ultimate harmony of both conscious and unconscious
aspects of personality (as refined phenomena of form) takes place directly in
purely (empty) spiritual terms.
However
though In Christian mysticism various levels of advanced spiritual development
may be recognised, there is a failure to properly distinguish these stages with
respect to their subtle, causal and nondual features with considerable overlap
in evidence. And this ultimately relates to a corresponding failure to properly
distinguish conscious and unconscious aspects of experience.
In
various Buddhist and Hindu Eastern traditions by contrast an extraordinary
degree of detail is available with respect to the more advanced contemplative
stages with respect to states. However corresponding information with respect
to the phenomenal structural features of these stages is significantly missing.
In other words I would find an undue emphasis on the aspect of emptiness as
opposed to form in these traditions.
Now
to be fair I think part of the problem lies mainly in finding an acceptable
scientific way of distinguishing as between conscious (form) and unconscious
(state). Remarkably I have found that mathematics provides this very language
(when its symbols are given an appropriate holistic interpretation).
Q. Can you briefly take us through
- from your perspective - the initial phase of H2?
PC
As we have seen H1 culminates in a substantial purgation i.e. dynamic negation
of the deep-rooted phenomenal constructs (cognitive, affective and volitional).
This is what is classically referred to as “the dark night of the soul” though
more explicitly it refers - using St.
John’s
However
though this does indeed lead to the substantial erosion of (ego) attachment to
conscious phenomena, it usually leads to significant (temporary) repression of
the unconscious. For example in attempting to spiritually transcend the body
(in the desire for Spirit) one can end up significantly repressing basic
emotional instincts.
So
recovery from the “dark night” is often associated with a special moment of
crisis leading to a decisive change in direction. In other words, one switches from the
negation of what is conscious to the positing and affirmation of what is
unconscious. And because so many instincts have been unwittingly repressed for
long periods (in the name of spiritual progress), this can lead to the
resurfacing into consciousness of many old desires (that one thought had been overcome).
Q. Is this resurfacing of such
desires an unhealthy development?
PC
Not really! Indeed it may serve a very necessary function. The problem with
transcendent spiritual desire, which characterised the previous stage, is that
it can lead to substantial problems of dislocation from the world. So in
following an intense spiritual path and learning to inhabit a strange and
terrifying underworld as one’s customary environment, one can easily lose touch
with everyday life. So the resurfacing
of old desires and ambitions can lead to an attempt to get a foothold once more
in the world accommodating to its everyday concerns. In this way one relearns
social and work skills enabling one to adjust better to the environment. Indeed
for a while might feel greatly relieved at this apparent return to normality
seeing one’s former experience as a strange aberration that thankfully has
passed.
Q. You say that it is an apparent
return to normality. Presumably this phase does not last?
PC
No! Even though one may not initially see this clearly, the problem is that one
now experiences reality in a very different manner. In other words because
substantial erosion of consciousness has already taken place (during the
previous stage) the unconscious can only project itself into experience in a
very short-lived manner. So there is no stable supporting framework of
established conscious phenomena to absorb such projections.
What
this means in effect is that one begins to experience again a great sense of
futility and restlessness with respect to ego type ambitions.
So
now the dynamic negation of these indirectly inspired projections into
consciousness also takes place in what represents the first direct purgation
(or cleansing) of the unconscious. Then as at the previous stage this leads to
further incubation of the Spirit - in the now more refined unconscious -
preceding a further illumination phase.
Q So dealing again first with the
affective aspect, what is the nature of this new illumination and how does it
substantially differ from the previous level?
PC
It should be pointed out that affective, cognitive and volitional aspects
overlap to a much greater extent during this level remaining somewhat
continuous in development. However we can for understanding purposes still
separate the three aspects to some extent.
As
one might expect, illumination is of a more refined nature where conscious
attachment (of either a primary or secondary nature) has been greatly reduced.
Because of this the symbols that become manifest in experience possess a
clearer archetypal type quality (as expressive of pure emptiness). However the
closer one comes to emptiness, any indirect phenomenal manifestation becomes of
an increasingly transient and subtle nature. So while these symbols play an
important role as mediators of Spirit they can prove extremely elusive.
For
example a new enriched holistic experience may unfold (with internal and
external polarities largely unified). So the subtle interplay is now between
whole and part where any division as between the personal and impersonal
aspects of reality are bridged. Here a spiritually intimate affective
relationship could serve as the means of mediating both the archetypal nature
of each (individual) person (as God) and simultaneously the archetypal nature
of the (collective) whole of created nature (likewise as God). So in this way any clear division as between
whole and part (that exists at the linear analytic level of interpretation) is
subtly eroded. In other words, in spiritual affective terms the whole is now
continually reflected through the part, and likewise the part is reflected
through the whole.
However
it has to be realised - that because we are dealing here directly with the
vertical polarities - that a very close relationship exists as between the
higher and lower stages (in complementary terms).
Thus
one becomes extremely sensitive at this time to corresponding “low-level”
primitive instinctive projections (e.g. of a sexual nature). In other words the
higher one goes towards pure affective experience of Spirit, the lower one must
likewise go in terms of unearthing, as it were, the pure instinctive nature of
physical desire. So it is the very purity of spiritual experience that enables
the free instinctive projection of physical desire.
Q. Presumably this corresponds
with what is referred to as “temptation” in Christian ascetical mysticism.
However I understand that you are not too impressed with the way that
“temptation” is viewed in such literature.
PC
Unfortunately an unduly negative notion of the body is often in evidence
reflecting the standard hierarchical notion of body, mind and spirit. There is therefore a tendency in Christian mystical literature
for the body to be treated as an obstacle to - rather than an equal partner in -
the attainment of union. Even St. John
Q. So what is the positive role of
sexual temptation?
PC
Well, it reveals what are truly our physical desires. Now of course we could
maintain the stance that such desires are not welcome and thereby misleadingly
attempt to repress them (in the name of Spirit). However in the end this
represents a form of emotional dishonesty that can serve as an important
barrier to true spiritual freedom. So the important thing is to accept erotic
temptation as telling us something very important about our true nature, which
must be freely faced.
In
other words, when involuntary attachment exists with respect to such desires,
it means that they have not been fully accepted as an integral physical aspect
of personality. So what always exists in
such cases is an implicit ranking system where one considers pure spiritual
moments of illumination as more worthy than intimate moments of primitive
erotic temptation.
Q. And is this not the case?
PC
No! When we value the spiritual above the physical this inevitably leads to a
voluntary attachment to the spiritual (as opposed to the physical aspect of
development). And when this happens the body attempts to compensate through
involuntary projection of instinctive desire into consciousness.
However
when the body is viewed equally with Spirit, voluntary attachment to Spirit is
eroded (and thereby involuntary attachment to the body).
Q. Does purgation work in the same
way as at the previous level?
PC
Because a much greater degree of integration as between opposite polarities
(especially external and internal) has been already achieved, this leads in
turn to a more continuous relationship as between illumination and purgation.
Though illumination is of a more refined nature it is extremely passive (where
conscious faculties remain largely dormant). With experience now so much at an
unconscious level, even illumination often resembles the night though of a more
tranquil nature (as if lit by gentle moonlight).
Then
in the purgative periods this gentle light and consolation is taken away though
not in the dramatic fashion of the previous stage. St. John
When
one acclimatises properly to the (unconscious) dark it can in fact bring a deep
sense of peace, so much so in fact that one may prefer to dwell in it than
return to the maelstrom of conscious light and activity.
So
the severe psychological problems associated with the “dark nights” of the
previous level are due to the very rapid exposure to unconscious levels of
experience (with which one is not yet accustomed).
Q. Let’s move on the cognitive
aspect. Again how does development differ here from the previous level?
PC
Firstly in more general terms this level – because it is deeply based in the
refined light of the unconscious – is very well suited to the universal
holistic appreciation of the structure of reality.
So
a very dim spiritual intuitive light that is of very long wavelength and low
frequency (i.e. very passive) is used in conjunction with highly refined
paradoxical structures of form.
Because
of the substantial integration of internal and external polarities (at H1) it
facilitates a new type of understanding where the complementarity of physical
and psychological reality becomes readily apparent.
Then
in its most abstract formulation it leads to the realisation of the
complementary relationship of holistic mathematical structures with respect to
both these physical and psychological aspects of reality.
However
as the level is fundamentally conditioned by the dynamic relationship as between
whole and part it is to this that we now turn.
The
relationship between whole and part (and part and whole) is central to all
understanding. For example any phenomenon that arises in experience (as a
specific perception) is intimately related to its corresponding general class
(as concept) and vice versa. So here we have the intimate relationship of part
and whole (and whole and part).
Now
at the level of linear understanding a merely reduced understanding of this
relationship is available (where both aspects are viewed in conscious terms).
So
for example if we take the concept of number, in a linear interpretation it is
deemed to apply to all actual numbers within its class. So the reductionism
involved here relates to the fact that no clear qualitative distinction is made
as between the (whole) concept and the (part) perceptions to which it applies.
To
distinguish properly quantitative (rational) and qualitative (intuitive)
interpretation we must recognise that a concept has both a potential and actual
existence. So potentially the number concept can apply to any number perception
(which is infinite in scope). However in actual terms it necessarily applies to
numbers in finite terms.
So
once again when we attempt to define the relationship as between the number
concept and number perceptions in merely rational (conscious) terms a reduced
interpretation necessarily results (where the potential infinite notion is
defined in actual finite terms).
Thus
to avoid such reductionism we must realise that all understanding of concepts
(and perceptions) has both conscious (rational) and unconscious (intuitive)
aspects which dynamically interact in experience.
In
holistic mathematical terms whereas the conscious aspect is real the
unconscious aspect (which presents itself in experience in an indirect
conscious manner) is imaginary.
So
properly understood, all understanding (of both concepts and perceptions) is
complex (with both real and imaginary aspects).
We
could equally say that the relationship between whole and part (and part and
whole) is complex with both real and imaginary aspects.
Thus
to avoid reductionism in any appropriate context, if the part is considered as
real (i.e. as actual in finite terms), then the whole is – relatively - imaginary
(i.e. as potential in an infinite manner).
Likewise
in reverse if the whole is now considered as real, then the part is –
relatively – imaginary.
Rigidity
with respect to (real) conscious experience results when the corresponding
(imaginary) unconscious aspect is not properly realised.
However
with both aspects properly incorporated into experience, a smooth highly
dynamic creative interchange results as between whole and part (i.e. concepts
and their related perceptions in experience).
Q. So how precisely does a H2
cognitive understanding differ from the corresponding H1 understanding of the
previous level?
PC
Though understanding at H1 is already of a proper circular kind, relating to
the paradoxical complementarity of polar opposites, it is only two-dimensional
(i.e. where opposites are considered in solely conscious terms).
So
every conscious phenomenon is viewed as having “real” positive and negative
polarities (which keep switching in experience).
However
understanding at H2 is now four-dimensional (where opposites are considered
with respect to both their conscious and unconscious aspects).
So
every phenomenon is now viewed as complex having both real (conscious) and
imaginary (unconscious) polarities (which again keep switching in experience).
Q. What is the deeper significance
of this approach to understanding?
PC
Though we will be looking at this in more detail later but the two-dimensional
understanding of H1 is necessary as a means of properly reconciling the twin
(horizontal) aspects of stages of selfhood (as psychological) and stages of
reality (as physical) throughout development.
As
each stage in dynamic terms has both a structure aspect (as form) and state
aspect (as emptiness) the four-dimensional understanding is then necessary to additionally
reconcile in vertical terms stages as structures and stages as states
throughout development.
Q. Is there an intimate vertical
complementarity as between H2 (causal) and L2 (magical) in cognitive
terms?
PC
Indeed there is, as once again the key feature of the integrative process is
the continual manner in which H2 and L2 interact with respect to all key modes.
So
there is a valid sense in which we can view H2 in a discrete linear manner
(insofar as such hierarchical understanding still persists at this level), the
continuous circular aspect – whereby two-way integration both within and
between stages takes place – is now more prominent.
So
once again – as with the affective mode – any high-level attachment to the
refined paradoxical understanding of H2, leads to low-level compensation where
linear understanding is involuntarily projected into consciousness.
Indeed
such projections can prove very humbling with irrational dualistic attitudes
and prejudices still too easily intruding into everyday discourse.
In
other words as long as one consciously deems the new refined paradoxical
understanding as “superior”, attitudes and thoughts reflecting unreformed
“inferior” understanding will be involuntarily projected into consciousness.
So
ultimately the only way of achieving true freedom of Spirit is to become rid of
any remaining attachment (positive or negative) to “higher” or “lower” levels.
Q. Are you implying that H2 is not
really a higher level than L2?
PC
One has to be very careful here! From the discrete linear perspective there is
a certain limited validity in maintaining such an asymmetrical distinction.
However
from a truly integrative perspective (which ultimately is nondual) the
relationship between both is merely relative. In other words two-way
integration requires that we reconcile L2 from the perspective of H2 (top-down)
and equally then reconcile H2 from the (revisited) perspective of L2
(bottom-up). So clearly when pure integration is achieved (in nondual spiritual
awareness), hierarchical rankings lose any residual meaning.
Q. Moving on the volitional mode,
how is it manifested at H2?
PC Once again in certain ways there
is similarity with the previous level of H1.
We
saw there how the volitional aspect attempts to harmonise both affective and
cognitive modes with respect to moral decision-making. And this is done in a
very refined manner, where a sensitive form of discernment is used which is
related to a faint intuitive signal in conscience signifying what is most
appropriate in any given circumstance.
So
internal (personal) and external (impersonal) criteria with respect to
decisions are thereby balanced in this manner.
However
at H1 – which operates at a more conscious level - there is still a bias
towards rational control (though of a very refined nature) with respect to
decisions.
In
other words, because of an unduly transcendent focus at this stage, one still
attempts to keep subtle control over the (unconscious) emotions and bodily
instincts. Thus remaining true to one’s conscience at this stage may well be
consistent with a degree of repression of the “lower” self.
However
because at H2 experience is so much tied up with the direct experience of the
unconscious (which initially expresses itself in an involuntary fashion) moral
decisions tend to reflect these new circumstances.
In
other words the involuntary nature of projection always reflects former
attempts at control (in a voluntary rational fashion).
So
if one is to loosen the involuntary nature of projection - thereby facilitating
the free exercise of will – one must remove the desire for conscious control.
So the correct stance with projections is to simply respond with patience
listening to the valuable messages that they contain about our repressed
emotions but without trying to unduly suppress them (through conscious effort).
Put
another way, a deeper affective type of response is now required to balance the
previous dominance of the cognitive aspect.
Truly
it comes down to a radical form of self-honesty. We often think we are being
honest with our decisions when in fact at a deeper level of personality we are
being fundamentally dishonest. Though it is indeed very difficult, true honesty
requires recognising and accepting how we actually feel in all circumstances
rather than acting on some second hand prescription of how we are supposed to
feel.
Q. Presumably we have an enhanced
experience of H1 from the perspective of H2. Briefly what is its nature?
PC
I have described the structural nature of H1 in terms of the two-dimensional
relating of paradoxical opposites i.e. where in any context two opposite poles
are identified as complementary with each other.
At
H1, it would be clearly realised for example that this level has opposite
internal and external polarities are complementary with each other.
However
a further refinement would come in this understanding through the perspective
of H2. Now one would more clearly realise that these opposite polarities are
complementary with each other with respect to both states and structures (that
are still viewed in a relatively independent manner).
By
contrast with the new (default) understanding of H2 one would understand how
these states and structures are interdependent with each other. This requires a
more refined type of paradoxical understanding, which I refer to as Type 2
Complementarity.
The
combination then of both types of complementary understanding further
facilitates both the top-down and bottom-up vertical integration of stages.
For
example H1 and L1 and H2 and L2 can be linked in a two-way fashion with each
other true Type 1 Complementarity.
Then
H1 and H2 and L1 and L2 can be linked with each other through Type 2
Complementarity.
Q. Why can’t full integration be
properly achieved at the H2 level?
PC
Development rarely takes place in a balanced manner. For example some are
extroverts and others are much more introverted in personality. And even with
integration this basic personality facet is likely to remain.
Therefore
at H1 (where one mainly attempts to integrate the horizontal opposites in
personality (i.e. internal and external) an introvert for example is more
likely to do this from one perspective i.e. attempting to relate the world to
the self (rather than the self to the world).
Then
at H2 where the focus is on vertical type integration once more there will be a
tendency to concentrate on “higher” and “lower” complementary opposites with
respect to psychological stages of selfhood (rather stages of reality). Also
when one attempts to integrate “higher” and “lower” levels - depending on
whether one is more a cognitive or an affective type personality - there is
likely to be a somewhat unbalanced emphasis on the structures or states of
these levels respectively.
So
true integration may require a greater degree of balance with respect to both
(internal) psychological and (external) physical aspects of reality; also with
respect to (whole) states and (part) structures.
Q. So to sum up what is the structural nature
of H2?
PC H2
as we have seen complements L2. L2 starts from a situation where confused
complementarity exists with respect to both vertical and horizontal polarities
(with a degree of stable differentiation with respect to the diagonal
polarities).
H2
concludes with the situation where mature complementary integration has been
achieved with respect to both horizontal and vertical polarities with however
linear differentiation existing with respect to the diagonal polarities of
fundamental form and emptiness.
H3
(Higher 3) - Nondual
We
now move on to H3, which – with qualifications – that we will deal with later
is the most advanced level of the higher band. For convenience we will identify
this with nondual reality. However because I am using a classification of
stages that is uniquely defined by the holistic mathematical approach there is
not an exact equivalence with stages defined by other methods.
The
key point is that with the continual refining of phenomenal form through the
growing paradoxical appreciation of the complementary nature of all dualistic
opposites, that spiritual contemplative awareness (as state) approaches pure
emptiness.
We
saw how development initially started with the differentiation of the body
mind, before proceeding to differentiation of the emotional and mental selves
respectively. Then on the home journey – as it were – integration takes place
in reverse fashion. So we first have the attempt at integration through the
mental self at H1. Though this is associated with a great growth in authentic
spiritual awareness, it is still too reliant on the conscious aspect.
Then
we have at H2 a switch to integration through the emotional self. In other
words with the emphasis now directly on the unconscious aspect one learns to
become especially responsive to emotional signals.
However
both the cognitive and affective aspects are themselves dependent for
integration ultimately through the volitional aspect of will (which is central
to both).
So
at H3 the emphasis is on this primary form of integration directly through the
will. In complementary fashion any defects with respect to the pure operation
of the will leads to the instinctive promptings of the bodyself. So the main
source of conflict at H3 is directly between the body and Spirit. In other
words the purer one’s spiritual desire, the more sharply are brought into focus
the involuntary instinctive prompting of the psychophysical organism of the
body (that is not yet fully reconciled with Spirit).
Q. Can full voluntary control of
bodily interactions be obtained? If this were so surely we would have the power
to prevent illness and directly heal the body through mind?
PC
Undoubtedly some great spiritual adepts have managed to obtain considerable
mastery at this stage. Though increased power with respect to the body would
undoubtedly be obtained by someone going through this stage it is likely to
remain somewhat limited in most cases. In other words the capacity to endure
these levels varies greatly with very few destined to experience them in a
substantial manner. Even for those who do, the purity and intensity can vary
considerably.
However
even then unique perspectives can be associated with even lesser experiences.
And the perspective I am offering is the one from which Holistic Mathematics
originated.
Q. So what are they key
characteristics of H3?
PC
Because one is now immersed at a very deep level of unconscious awareness, one
lives entirely by night in a dark – though usually peaceful – underworld.
Day
time activities and responsibilities of course continue (though perhaps at a
reduced level). Indeed a healthy sign of mastery of this stage is the ability
to adapt normally to life. In other words outside observers would not notice
anything unusual about one’s behaviour. They would have little realisation
however of the hidden life absorbing the personality in the depths of the
unconscious.
So
one acts as if continually asleep with respect to daily life! Thus one
sleepwalks as it were, or perhaps more accurately sleepwakes through
activities. Though clearly one must consciously relate to the appropriate
phenomena to carry out these activities, because so little attachment now
exists they have very little hold over memory. Thus though one may deal with a
number of tasks (more or less successfully) during the day, when they have been
completed, they are quickly forgotten.
So it seems as if nothing has happened and that one has not achieved
anything.
With
respect to the unconscious, projections still take place. However because a
considerable degree of attachment has by this stage been obtained over such
projections, though they can be indeed be quite intense when they arise, they tend
to be increasingly of an extremely short short-lived nature again passing
instantly out of memory.
So
as one approaches closer to a continual state of spiritual emptiness, memory
itself becomes increasingly cleansed of residual rigid attachment. Indeed
because of this, the volitional desire for Spirit can remain unclouded by
secondary concerns. In other words, though remarkably uneventful from a
phenomenal perspective, it now becomes much easier to remain totally absorbed
in Spirit (hidden in the depths of personality).
Q. Once again can we look in more
detail at development of the three primary modes, cognitive and volitional with
respect to H3?
PC
I should stress once again that I am portraying just one kind of experience of
the various levels. As mentioned before I would see this as characteristic of
the complex Enneagram type (combining 4 and 5). Even for this type, development
will be unique for each individual where it can vary in a number of ways.
However
it is still valid to provide this particular account of such development as it
provides an essential backdrop for appreciation of the origin and nature of
Holistic Mathematics. And though accepting that individual development can vary
in countless ways, yet Holistic Mathematics has the power to provide a
universal scientific mapping of the nature of the dynamic structures involved
in all such development.
Q. I suppose to use an analogy,
you are aiming to provide all the essential lego pieces for development which
can then be assembled in a variety of equally valid ways (depending on
personality and circumstances).
PC
Yes! but we must conceive of these “pieces” in dynamic rather than static
manner. Also I am concerned directly here with the fundamental operating system
of development rather than - as it were - application software.
Q. So all the ingredients of the
operating system software, as you put it, by definition can be found in any
personality. However the full flowering of personality requires removing – at the
various levels of development – confusion as to how this software properly
operates.
And the proper removal of a
characteristic form of confusion constitutes the specialised unfolding of each
level. And with all confusion removed – through the full unfolding of all
levels – only pure Spirit remains? In other words if we could see clearly as it
were (in the pure light of Spirit), then only Spirit would remain. Is that it?
PC
Indeed! However I would just qualify slightly by saying that while we are in a
human mortal condition this goal can only be approximated (though never
entirely reached). In other words as human, emptiness (in the pure desire for
Spirit) always entails form (in the removal of remaining phenomenal barriers to
such vision).
Therefore
though we can continually refine the relationship as between form and emptiness
(and emptiness and form) we can never totally sever the dualistic connection.
For
example even the greatest spiritual adepts remain confined to a phenomenal body
that they never fully escape in this life.
Q. What is the nature of affective
understanding at this stage?
PC
Again this can vary considerably depending on personality. For one primarily
identified as a “thinking” type, conscious attachment to phenomena can be
largely dead at this time. However this would equally indicate a bigger problem
at an unconscious level in terms of coming to grips with projected phenomena
revealing perhaps emotions (not properly recognised at a conscious level).
However
because considerable exposure to such phenomena has already taken place at H2,
these now will be of an increasingly short-lived nature. Though they may
intensely engage the mind when they arise they tend to pass quickly leaving
little phenomenal trace.
H3
is concerned with reconciliation of the diagonal polarities of form and
emptiness. This entails immediate psychophysical reactions of the body. So one
realises keenly that every psychological impulse of an affective kind
evokes a corresponding physical reaction in the body.
So
the emotions, of which one now becomes increasingly aware, are those impulses which are
directly associated with stress reactions on the body.
Here
a diagonal interaction as between higher and lower levels (with respect to
opposite internal and external polarities takes place.
For
example any remaining subtle level attachment to higher level intellectual
understanding (in external objective terms) is quickly associated with
corresponding low level attachment through affective impulses from the
unconscious (in internal subjective terms).
So
as the volitional element becomes intimately central, cognitive and affective
aspects become ever more closely associated in this diagonal manner.
One
important aspect not previously discussed is a deep existential type of fear
that can arise at this time. This again has twin characteristics representing
on the one hand a refined form of spiritual fear i.e. that one might even yet
forsake this pure spiritual path and an instinctive form of fear with respect
to physical death i.e. that one may lose one’s physical body.
As
we shall see this fear can sometimes only be resolved through a severe health
crisis (where one’s physical body is indeed in serious danger).
Q. And what about the cognitive aspect at H3?
PC
Because we are now approaching close to pure emptiness (as Spirit) paradoxical
understanding of form is now of an extremely subtle kind.
Whereas
H1 relates to paradoxical understanding with respect to real (conscious)
opposite poles of experience and H2 additionally to such understanding with
respect to imaginary (unconscious) poles, H3 relates to the simultaneous
understanding of such poles as both real (conscious) and imaginary
(unconscious).
In
other words as experience approaches pure emptiness, both the conscious and
unconscious aspects of personality become so closely intertwined that phenomena,
that are now of an extremely refined and transient nature, no longer even
appear to arise in consciousness.
Though
we will be dealing with this more fully in a later discussion, holistic
mathematics can provide a remarkably coherent account of the nature of these
structures.
Basically
this relates to eight dimensional interpretation of reality (corresponding to
the eight roots of unity) where the four additional roots represent in
geometric terms as diagonal lines the polarities of form and emptiness.
In
mathematical terms these polarities have twin interpretations. From the
perspective of form they equally combine both real and imaginary aspects
(representing in holistic terms the harmonious balance of both conscious and
unconscious). From the perspective of emptiness, these diagonal or null lines
have a magnitude of zero (representing the pure awareness of Spirit).
Put
another way, for Spirit to be experienced as pure emptiness, both conscious and
unconscious aspects of personality must be fully harmonised.
Q You refer often to the holistic
mathematical interpretation of the three fundamental polarities as constituting
a Theory of Everything. What do you mean?
PC
It should become clearer through later discussions how the structure all the
stages of development – to a remarkable level of detail - can be scientifically
encoded in terms of the holistic mathematical interpretation of these three
polarities. For example we will be going into this more fully soon with respect
to the levels of development.
In
this sense human development – and by extension all living processes – can be
seen through and through to have a fundamental holistic mathematical structure
(relating to these three polarities). Put another way, all holons dynamically
interact in terms of the three polarities.
However
I would stress that this TOE – though extremely important in integral terms –
has validity only with respect to the (hidden) universal manner that it affects all
processes.
At
the level of manifest phenomena, explanations must also possess an analytic
aspect (with a more restricted range of application).
Conventional
science as we know deals largely with such analytic explanations. However,
though extremely valuable in a restricted setting, such explanations do now
work at an overall integral level of meaning.
So
what ultimately is required is - what I term - radial science where both
analytic and holistic methods of understanding are freely combined.
However
just as the holistic science (culminating in a TOE) is a cognitive expression
of the most advanced of the spiritual contemplative stages, likewise radial
science is properly a cognitive expression of the radial stages (which we have
not yet dealt with).
Q Is there a sense in which a TOE
is equally a TON (i.e. Theory of Nothing)?
PC
Yes! This inevitably is the case. The more one comes closer to a universal
understanding of what connects all reality (at its most fundamental levels) the
further we are from any specific analytic phenomenal representations of such
reality (which always implies arbitrary restrictions).
So
a TOE as I define it is the cognitive theoretical expression of the refined
nature of form that is consistent with the pure spiritual contemplative
experience of emptiness.
Thus
though it has an extremely important holistic mathematical rationale, it is an
inherently more contemplative than rational vision.
Q Are you saying that you cannot
have a radial TOE (where analytic and holistic understanding are combined)?
PC
Strictly no! Whereas the holistic aspect is a TOE (in the sense I define it),
the analytical aspects have - necessarily - only a partial validity.
Thus
radial understanding represents the interaction of this (hidden) TOE with
(manifest) Theories of Something.
However
an enhanced appreciation of the holistic TOE aspect becomes available at the
radial levels.
Q. Let us move on the volitional
aspect. You say this is most important AT H3?
PC
Ultimately the experience of pure Spirit is inseparable from the pure desire
for Spirit.
And
this pure desire or motivation is the direct expression of the will. Clearly
when phenomenal attachment exists in any measure it clouds the desire for
Spirit, which in turn inhibits its pure experience.
AT
H3 however attachment to phenomena (both direct and indirect) has now been
eroded to a considerable extent. This thereby enables the purer continual
desire for Spirit to be experienced.
Q. However as presumably some
attachment still exists what is the nature of such attachment?
PC
Again attachment exists in two complementary forms. At the higher level we have
a very refined attachment to the paradoxical forms through which Spirit is
mediated that still reflects a lingering attitude of superiority. Typically
this attitude becomes filtered through the intellect. Put another way this
reflects an attitude where the transcendent aspect of Spirit is still emphasised
to a greater degree than the immanent.
At
the corresponding low level we have extremely primitive instinctive projections
of an involuntary nature into consciousness (usually of a very transient
nature).
In
complementary terms these involuntary impulses e.g. erotic desire and anger
reflect a lingering attitude of inferiority with respect to affective stimuli.
Thus
because they are not fully valued (as consistent with spiritual attainment)
they are unconsciously repressed (reflecting the higher level superior
attitude). Then they are involuntarily projected into consciousness until
proper assimilation takes place.
Thus
when all higher-level attachment ceases, the involuntary nature of lower level
projections also ceases.
This
final hurdle however can prove very difficult to overcome.
Because
we are now so close to pure instinctive response, such involuntary stimuli become
of a direct psychophysical nature, where conscious and unconscious aspects are
still closely embedded with each other.
Thus
one cannot disentangle such phenomena either through any refined attempt at
(conscious) control on the one hand or (unconscious) response on the other.
Q. So how does purgation take
place?
PC
One becomes especially sensitive at this time to physiological signals
indicating a lack of the required integration. Thus one may suddenly become prone to
all sorts of stress symptoms culminating in mysterious health problems.
So
any remaining lack of integration is directly experienced through the body.
Then through a great deal of patience one learns to tune in and adapt to these
bodily signals gradually bringing about the desired healing.
Thus
though in a certain sense a new bodymind is acquired at every level of
development (with its characteristic psychophysical manner of adaption) this is
especially relevant at H3). Only then can the full integration of Spirit with
the bodymind (and the bodymind with Spirit) take place.
So
what was first to be differentiated in experience (bodymind) is the last to be
properly integrated.
Also
it is very interesting how earliest infant development - leading to
differentiation of the bodymind - takes place through sensori motor activity
directly through the body.
Now
in reverse this latest integral development takes place directly through the
body (however this time in a very passive manner).
Q. You believe that it may take a
severe health crisis to resolve this integration problem?
PC
Many levels are marked (at the beginning and end) by special defining moments.
In
the end the problems of integration here are due to a subtle form of
existential fear.
On
the one hand - having surrendered so much - one is fearful of losing the
spiritual path. This leads one to still cling on to a degree to higher-level
spiritual understanding.
On
the other hand one is fearful of losing the physical body, which leads to the
involuntary primitive projections from the unconscious.
Overcoming
this fear may then require that one is threatened with physical death perhaps
through some mysterious health problem. Then in confronting this fear the
crucial barrier to integration with Spirit may be lifted.
Q. You draw complementary
parallels as between this near physical death and physical birth when one
enters the world. Can you briefly elaborate?
PC
It is important to stress that there are two spiritual directions throughout
development, which are finally integrated at H3.
Firstly
there is the transcendent direction, which culminates in a psychological death
(through detachment from all material phenomena). This leads to an entombment
of Spirit (in the hidden unconscious) where its purity intensifies before being
released as the empty source of (renewed) phenomenal creation.
Secondly
there is the immanent direction, which culminates in a (symbolic) physical
death (through detachment from all spiritual phenomena). This leads to a
corresponding enwombment of form (likewise in the unconscious) where it is
likewise refined before being released as the manifest aspect of reborn
creation.
So
just as we have a embryonic state before infant birth takes place, likewise we
have a new embryonic state before mystic rebirth can take place (with both form
and emptiness integrated with each other in a manner free of possessive
attachment).
Q. Strangely you see the
experience of H3 - despite its advanced nature - as potentially limiting and
even perilous. Why is this?
PC
I am describing a type of experience where specialisation takes place of
various facets of experience at the respective stages of development. However
this always requires a delicate balancing act and indeed in many ways resembles
walking a psychological tight rope. With less specialisation there is indeed
less danger of development going seriously wrong. However the same impetus for
advanced levels of experience is unlikely to be maintained.
Earlier
in development specialisation with respect to linear understanding took place
at the middle levels (which can significantly reduce access to the higher
levels). Here one can face the reverse problem where specialisation with
respect to circular understanding (consistent with the pure contemplative
vision) can significantly reduce access to linear understanding. Thus there is
a real danger of contemplatives becoming out of touch with reality where they
become unable to get properly immersed in fruitful activity on behalf of the
world.
So
a further adjustment - which we will deal with in the next discussion - may be
necessary before the radial levels can commence.
Q. So paradoxically full
integration cannot take place at H3?
PC
No! The problem is that differentiation and integration are themselves
complementary in experience. Though the middle levels represent a certain form
of specialisation with respect to differentiated experience – even in this
respect it is somewhat limited (due to lack of sufficient integration). In
other words a somewhat rigid type of differentiation takes place at these
levels.
In
corresponding fashion though a certain kind of specialisation also takes place
with respect to integral experience at the higher levels again it is somewhat
limited (due to lack of supporting phenomenally differentiated experience). In
other words an extreme contemplative focus can develop where one is not able to
successfully adapt to the world.
So
in the end the fullest expression of either activity (differentiation) and
contemplation (integration) require that they develop in mutual interdependence
with each other. And this is the task of the (specialised) development of the
radial levels.
There
is a clear logic to this treatment. If one accepts that earlier differentiation
centres first around the instinctive body (where volitional capacity is
especially primitive), then the emotional self and finally the mental self, then
we can see that the integration takes these in reverse orders.
However
considerable variations can be in evidence in practice e.g. due to distinctive
personality characteristics and life circumstances.
I
believe it is true to say that volitional capacity will always be the last to
be fully developed. However depending on personality type, either the affective
or cognitive aspects could predominate during the unfolding of the earlier of the
higher stages. For example Evelyn
Underhill
My
own treatment is consistent with one avenue of development for the complex
personality type (4 and 5) in the Enneagram system. Once again I would see
Holistic Mathematics as a unique cognitive expression of higher-level
development for this type.
However
the value of any authentic account of such development is that it opens up a
window to the same kinds of issues that must be faced by all (admittedly in a
multivaried fashion) who seek spiritual union.
Q. Finally what is the structural
nature of H3?
PC
Again a full holistic mathematical account awaits a further discussion. However
at this point suffice it to say that H3 represents the mature (circular)
complementarity with respect to all three sets of fundamental polarities
horizontal (within each level), vertical (between levels) and diagonally
(simultaneously within and between levels). And of course when these levels are
understood as fully complementary in this manner the very meaning of a level
(in a dualistic hierarchical sense) disappears. So strictly H3 culminates in a
nondual experience (that is without levels).
Again
this complements L3 where the same complementarity exists in a confused
fashion. So just as human development commences without distinct levels
(because all potentially are still entangled with each other) it culminates at
H3 without distinct levels (as all have been actually integrated with each
other).
No comments:
Post a Comment