H3 (Higher
3) - Null (Nondual)
Q. We now come to the third of the
higher levels. Once again what are the key characteristics of this level?
PC In
accordance with the approach I am adopting, we move closer here to a purely
contemplative awareness of reality. Therefore inherent in this contemplative
vision is the experience of both - what from a dualistic perspective are - the
internal (psychological) and external (physical) poles of reality as identical
in Spirit.
However
form does still exist in an extremely refined manner where both the conscious
and unconscious aspects of phenomena that arise are acknowledged.
In other
words every phenomenon now has both a real (conscious) and imaginary
(unconscious) - projected as indirectly conscious - identity.
The very
realisation of these two aspects itself reflects the increasingly rapid yet
smooth dynamic interaction arising from significant erosion of the symbols
through which they are mediated.
Remember
that this level is characterised by the fundamental relationship as between the
polarities of form and emptiness.
Therefore
from the perspective of form, we have structures that are increasingly
psychophysical (due to established recognition of the complementarity of both
aspects in experience).
From the
perspective of emptiness however, the level is characterised by growing
contemplative absorption in a state approaching pure emptiness.
Q. You refer to this third set of
polarities (i.e. form and emptiness) as diagonal. What do you mean by this?
PC At H1, we have the interaction of the
horizontal polarities (external and internal) that operate within a given
level. Then at H2, we have the additional interaction of the vertical
polarities (whole and part) that operate between various levels. However it is
in the nature of personality that initially there may be a bias in one
direction. Thus for example, because some are basically introverts and other
extraverts, there can be undue emphasis at H1 on just one side of integration. So
an introvert will attempt to integrate the external (physical) aspect of
reality with respect to the - relatively - stronger internal (psychological)
side, whereas the extravert by contrast will attempt to integrate the internal
aspect with respect to the stronger external side.
Then at
H2 the more cognitively oriented personality may typically attempt to integrate
the various nondual states of emptiness from the perspective of established dynamic
structures of form whereas the affective type may tend to be more states led
(with perhaps insufficient grounding in the formal structures of each level).
Whereas the former approach can be associated with too much stability (and
consequent rigidity) the latter can lead to very rapid change in states (and
consequent instability).
Thus
there is need to balance extremes both horizontally and vertically, for each
personality to function properly and the precise mix that is required to do
this will vary considerably depending on circumstances.
In
general the nature of integration at H3 requires that the horizontal
aspect of a higher level (as stage of self or reality) be balanced by the
corresponding opposite aspect of the complementary lower level; also that the
vertical aspect of the higher (i.e. as structure or state) be balanced by the
opposite characteristic at the lower.
So for
example, one with a strong intellectual capacity for objective interpretation of
the dynamic structures of form at H3 would require continual practice in attaining
equal capacity for interior understanding of the most primitive affective
instincts (associated with L3).
Thus the
process of attempted reconciliation is now diagonal in that it simultaneously
attempts to reconcile opposites in both horizontal and vertical terms.
Q. Can you briefly clarify again the
holistic mathematical rationale of this level?
PC H3 is
defined in terms of the eight roots of unity. As already seen the two real
roots (+ 1 and – 1) define the horizontal relationship between the opposite
polarities of (conscious) form (internal and external). The two imaginary roots
(+ i and – i) in turn define the vertical relationship as between the opposite
polarities of (unconscious) form (whole and part).
Now the
four additional complex roots 1/√2(1 + i), 1/√2(1 – i), 1/√2(– 1 + i) and
1/√2(– 1 – i) define the two diagonal relationships as between opposite
polarities of form and emptiness (that are simultaneously both conscious and
unconscious respectively).
As we
have seen experience at this stage is now so refined that all phenomena have
both conscious and unconscious aspects that ceaselessly interact with each
other. Because of this interaction, attachment to either aspect is so eroded
that phenomena that arise become increasingly short-lived.
In other
words experience approaches closer to a state of pure emptiness. Remarkably
this is apparent in the mathematical representation, for the diagonal lines
that are represented by complex numbers (with equal real and imaginary parts)
have an alternative explanation as null lines (with a magnitude of zero).
Thus,
inherent in these roots is an interpretation of the unification of form and
emptiness. In other words when the recognition of form approximates its most
refined expression i.e. with both real (conscious) and imaginary (unconscious)
aspects in perfect balance without attachment, then this coincides with the
pure experience of emptiness (as Spirit).
Q. Once again because we are
exploring each level with respect to both reality and self(hood) can you
explain the unique physical significance of H3?
PC When properly understood - in the context of
the scientific understanding appropriate to the stage - the mathematical
structure of this level provide a unique means of appreciating the holistic
nature of the physical forces. Furthermore it provides a compelling means for
interpretation of the ultimate state (before the appearance of phenomena) where
these forces are fully symmetrical and unified.
However
it is in the very nature of such an explanation that it is closer to
philosophical than - what is conventionally understood as - scientific
appreciation.
If we
take the electromagnetic force to illustrate, exemplified by physical light, we
see that its true nature is highly mysterious.
Indeed one
of the features that has puzzled physicists for some time is the dual manner of
how light manifests itself in nature i.e. its wave-particle complementarity.
Thus from
one perspective, light can be observed as composed of waves; however from another
equally valid perspective, it can be seen to be made up of individual particles
viz. photons.
Thus in a
partial context - where the frame of observational reference is arbitrarily
fixed - light is made up of either waves or particles. However in a holistic
context, which allows for the dynamic interaction of both frames, then light is
composed of both waves and particles.
Interestingly
therefore in the partial observational context where one sole aspect is
consciously observed the opposite aspect - in this context - remains hidden
from the observer.
Putting
it in more mathematical terms, the aspect which is observed in this partial
manner is “real” while the aspect remaining hidden from the observer is
“imaginary”.
And what
is “real” or “imaginary” keeps switching as the observational frame of
reference likewise switches.
So when
light is revealed as particles (i.e. photons) this manifest aspect is thereby
“real” with the corresponding wave aspect now “imaginary”.
However
when the observational frame of reference switches so that light is now
revealed as waves, this - now manifest - aspect is “real” with the
corresponding particle aspect “imaginary”.
Thus what
is “real” and “imaginary” with respect to conscious observation continually
alters depending on context.
However
when we look at light from a more holistic perspective (where it is not
directly observed) it reveals a very mysterious identity indeed as null lines.
In other
words light now defies finite measurement travelling an infinite distance in
zero time. So in its inherent state (travelling at its own speed) light is
literally empty (i.e. nothing in phenomenal terms).
Now the
complex roots of unity (which define the structure of H3) define this nature of
light very well.
On the
one hand from the perspective of form, light can be seen to have equal real and
imaginary aspects, which in a dynamic interpretation keep switching between one
another i.e. wave and particle aspects respectively.
However
equally from the perspective of emptiness, these roots, which in geometrical
terms are represented by diagonal lines (at a 45o angle to both
horizontal and vertical axes) can be seen as null lines = 0 (with no
magnitude).
Though we
have dealt with this before in relation to L3, it is in the very nature of H3
understanding that both of these explanations (of form and emptiness) are now reconciled.
So, true enhanced appreciation of the physical structures of L3 is inseparable
from corresponding psychological understanding of the complementary “higher”
level of H3.
Q Just a brief interjection here!
I can perhaps appreciate the significance of the real and imaginary units of
form (i.e. 1 and i) in these roots. However what about 1/1/√2 by which they are
all multiplied?
PC Good
question! You may remember that √2 - which is the best known of the (algebraic)
irrational numbers - symbolises above all the paradoxical nature of circular
two-dimensional understanding when expressed in reduced linear (i.e.
one-dimensional) format. Thus in terms of the either/or reasoning that typifies
linear reason, both/and understanding seems irrational.
Therefore
because such circular holistic understanding is embodied in the very nature of
imaginary understanding (as projected from the unconscious) it thereby is irrational
(i.e. paradoxical) in terms of real (i.e. linear analytic) understanding.
So in
mixing “real” and “imaginary” understanding, as it were, we are attempting
to combine two aspects (which are strictly incompatible in terms of each
other). Likewise in attempting to mix the wave and particle aspects of light we
are again combining two aspects that are likewise incompatible.
So just
as this reconciliation of opposing forms of understanding (conscious and
unconscious) can only be ultimately reconciled in the emptiness of pure Spirit,
likewise the reconciliation of the opposing aspects of light can likewise be
only reconciled in the emptiness of pure matter (i.e.. before phenomenal
manifestation).
Q. How do the other physical
forces fit into this interpretation?
PC
Basically they all have the same holistic mathematical structure. In other
words each force can manifest itself in the form of waves or particles. Also in
the holistic sense - when it travels at light speed (or perhaps force speed) - it
has no means of manifesting itself in finite terms.
So if we
are looking at the original super symmetry of forces before manifestation in
nature, we can say that they it is accurately characterised by the four
diagonal (i.e. complex) roots of unity.
In the
time of Einstein there were two principle forces i.e. electromagnetic and
gravitational. The two “new” forces i.e. weak and strong respectively can
perhaps be best viewed as internal manifestations of these two other forces
respectively. Thus the weak is like an electromagnetic force operating within
matter and revealed through breakdown e.g. radioactive decay. The strong force
is then like an internalised form of gravity which is extremely powerful over
short distances within the nucleus
Then the
electromagnetic and weak and also gravitational and strong would be connected
by the horizontal (internal-external) polarities.
The
electromagnetic (and weak) and gravitational (and strong) would then be
connected through the vertical (whole-part) polarities.
However
in a super symmetrical state - where all the forces would be identical - it
would not strictly matter in what direction these complementary connections are
taken.
Q You would maintain that the
complementarity of these forces in a sense is even obvious in terms of the use
of ordinary language?
PC Yes!
As we have seen natural light is one important manifestation of the
electromagnetic force. Also we recognise that the feeling of weight (heaviness)
comes from gravity. So we have here the direct contrast as between what is light
and heavy respectively.
Also the
very terms to describe the two “new” forces i.e. weak and strong (nuclear) are
themselves complementary opposites.
Q. So what would be the
corresponding psychological equivalent to the four physical forces?
This is
indeed very interesting! Just as the physical forces manifest themselves under
two aspects, likewise this is true with respect to the spiritual “forces” i.e.
in the manner in which Spirit visibly manifests itself through nature i.e.
immanence and transcendence.
So just
as the forces in physical terms act as the bridge connecting - what are
manifested as - (whole) dimensions and (part) phenomena, likewise the “forces”
in spiritual terms provide the basic source of all motivation in experience
likewise acting as the bridge connecting psychological experience of concepts
(dimensions) and perceptions (specific phenomena).
And
spiritual light can be seen in finite manifestations to have both wave and
particle aspects. Generally the wave aspect is identified with a more general
light in the transcendent experience of Spirit (with specific phenomena eroded
from awareness).
So
insofar as the experience is transcendent, the specific phenomena (i.e.
particle aspect) remain hidden;
However
this is reversed with the immanent experience where spiritual light -
relatively - is directly revealed through specific phenomena.
So now
the particle aspect directly manifests itself while the more universal
transcendent experience remains hidden.
Thus the
immanent and transcendent aspects of spiritual light directly correspond - in
complementary structural fashion - to the particle and wave aspects of physical
light respectively.
Likewise
in its infinite nature (without finite manifestation) spiritual light has an
empty (null) nature. In the transmission of light only the present moment
exists. In other words it travels an infinite distance in zero time.
We have
already seen that the Spirit e.g. in the experience of the “dark night” also
has a psychological gravitational aspect (where the dimensional aspect of
reality implodes).
And both
transcendent and immanent aspects can readily be seen to manifest themselves in
an external and internal manner.
Just as
with the physical forces, these four manifestations of Spirit i.e. the external
and internal aspects of transcendence and immanence respectively bear
complementary relationships with each other, so that in the super symmetrical
state of pure union (without any phenomenal manifestation) they are identical
in Spirit.
And
finally both the physical and spiritual forces bear strong complementary
relationships with each other in horizontal, vertical and diagonal terms.
So in the
same contemplative experience where the four manifestations of Spirit are
unified the four physical forces are likely unified in the pure experience that
simultaneously embraces the potentiality for phenomenal creation (before
phenomenal manifestation) and the fulfilment of this same creation (beyond any
phenomena).
Q This holistic scientific
explanation you are offering operates mainly in cognitive terms. What about
affective and volitional aspects?
PC As
always the volitional aspect is central being essential to bring about the
harmony of phenomenal opposites (in either affective or cognitive terms).
Likewise it is the very interaction of affective and cognitive aspects that
enables the corresponding interaction of real and imaginary aspects of
understanding. So this implies a successful holistic scientific appreciation of
reality at this level intimately depends on the corresponding successful
integration of both the cognitive and affective aspects of personality.
Upper (Intermediate)
Levels
We now
move on to the next (intermediary) band of levels which represent both the
further refinement and completion of the previous level and the corresponding
preparation for the unfolding of the radial levels.
H3L3 (Higher 3 Lower 3) – Pure Transcendence
Q. How does the experience of this
level with respect to physical and psychological aspects differ from the
previous level?
PC Basically
we are moving here from a relationship which involves aspects of both (phenomenal)
form and (spiritual) emptiness to one where only emptiness remains. More
correctly what this entails is that the experience of phenomenal form now
becomes so refined (with residual attachment significantly eroded) that it no
longer seems to arise in experience. Thus we have the relationship of extremely
dynamic - and short-lived - phenomena of form with emptiness. However this
process is not immediately perfected.
At this
level, a lingering attachment to the superiority of emptiness over form still
remains. In other words the transcendent aspect of reality (i.e. as Spirit
beyond created phenomena) still dominates to an extent over the corresponding
immanent aspect (of Spirit as within all created phenomena).
What this
entails is that remaining voluntary attachment to Spirit (as emptiness) is
associated with a compensating involuntary attachment to phenomena (as rigid
form).
Thus the
pure realisation of form and emptiness is not yet possible. In other words
fully balancing the physical and psychological aspects of reality requires that
the transcendent and immanent aspects of Spirit be likewise fully balanced.
H3L3 – R0 (Higher H3L3 – Radial 0) - Transcendence and
Immanence
Q.
And what happens at this level?
PC Basically it entails the gradual
erosion of remaining attachment to the “superior” transcendent aspect of
experience. This in turn lessens involuntary attachment to the “inferior”
immanent aspect.
Then the fully balanced
contemplative experience of pure Spirit (as emptiness) can take place without
rigid attachment to the refined phenomena of form continually arising.
This also entails that a decisive turning point now
takes place whereby a self- conscious need for further purgation - that
necessarily moves one away from active engagement with the World - ceases. In
other words the acceptance of appropriate cleansing in experience becomes better
established in the personality (under the instinctive guidance of the
volitional capacity). Put another way one’s will now is more fully united with
the will of God.
This means in effect that the slow preparation for
the movement out of the Spirit into the world of form (created anew in the
light of this pure Spirit) can now meaningfully take place.
Thus though in many ways this represents the most
passive of all levels with continual experience of an absorbing void (potentially
representing the world of created physical form) in visible terms there is yet
no significant change in evidence.
Q So can
you now give the full interpretation of contemplative union in terms of both
the psychological and physical aspects of reality at this stage?
PC From a transcendent perspective it entails the
union of the self (psychological) with Spirit i.e. as the goal or destiny
(omega point) of one’s existence.
However equally it entails in experience the union
of the whole cosmic universe (physical) with Spirit. So strictly speaking in
contemplative union there is no distinction as between the evolution of the
personal self or the impersonal world of matter as in truth both have now arrived
- through intimate interaction - at the same destiny in Spirit.
However from the immanent perspective - in relative
terms - we now journey back as it were to the very beginning of the self to
realise in an enhanced manner its total dependence as source on Spirit. This
represents the Alpha point therefore of psychological creation.
Equally in the same experiential moment, one
journeys back to the origins of all created matter in the physical Universe
again in the realisation of its total dependence as Source on Spirit.
So using dualistic language, pure contemplative
experience (that arises in the continual present moment) requires clear
realisation of the total dependence of personal self and impersonal world with
respect to both their origin as source and completion as goal in Spirit.
R0
(Radial 0) – Emptiness as Form
Q So what further changes take place at this stage?
PC Due to consolidation of this constant
state of contemplative awareness (the extent required of which will depend on
individual circumstances) one learns to relax more in the Spirit. This in turn
gradually frees the Spirit to flow from the unconscious back into a world of
newly created physical reality (revealed though the light of pure
consciousness).
Though there is not much in experience of
visible manifest phenomena, the slow dawning of a background spiritual light returns
which leads to an easing of one’s day to day activities.
This in fact implicitly entails an
extremely holistic universal type of cosmic form which gradually facilitates
one’s involvement at a local level. However there can still remain - especially
where the contemplative type of mysticism is involved - a significant gap
between the universal scope of one’s vision and its expression in practical
terms.
Radial Levels
We now finally
move on to the radial levels proper where the full mature interpenetration of a
deeply contemplative vision combined with fully committed action in the world
can gradually takes place.
R1 (Radial 1) – Spiritual Rebirth
Q. What is the special relationship as between the physical and psychological
aspects of reality at this level?
PC They are in fact still extremely
closely related. This is why the level can be associated with the birth of the
radial or cosmic bodyself which is an intimate experience of breathing in and
out the life of the Spirit through a body that is now identified as inseparable
from all phenomenal creation.
Bearing in mind that I am dealing with
development from the standpoint of the passive type where the contemplative
dimension - relatively - undergoes an extreme degree of specialisation, R1 is
still largely characterised by an empty physical state (where physical and
psychological aspects are identical).
However we have the emergence of
a new kind of understanding based on the gradual separation of the diagonal
polarities (form and emptiness). Just as these polarities were the last to be
integrated (before contemplative union), likewise they are the first to
separate at this radial stage.
What this entails is that phenomenal
experience both at global and local levels still remains very closely tied to the
direct promptings of Spirit (with little active use of cognitive, affective or
volitional faculties used). However as at the previous level there still can be
a considerable gap as between the universal contemplative vision, permanently
informing experience, and the somewhat restricted local expression of this
vision.
As I have maintained for some time that
I am attempting a (preliminary) Radial 1 approach with respect to outlining the
stages of development, perhaps it would be instructive to explain a little more
regarding what this means.
Radial 1 understanding best facilitates
an overall holistic approach to development where the fundamental dynamic
structure of all levels can be clearly encoded.
Moreover in scientific terms, this
encoding has a distinctive mathematical character.
1 is the holistic symbol of form (i.e.
the experience of form always implicitly entails the recognition of oneness)
whereas 0 is the holistic symbol of emptiness (i.e. the dynamic notion of
nothingness that serves as the potential for all created form).
Radial 1 - as I define it - is based on
the gradual separation of the diagonal polarities (i.e. of form and emptiness)
following their substantial reconciliation in contemplative union).
So the very scientific approach I use to
delineate the structures of all levels is of a mathematical character based on
the holistic interpretation of the binary digits 1 and 0.
So the spiritual light of R1 which is very passive in nature i.e. of exceptionally long wavelength and corresponding
low frequency, is ideal for facilitating reflection on the most universal
features of development (without distraction from more localised phenomena).
In other words though it facilitates a very
general type of linear expression - necessary to communicate the scientific
nature of integral developmental structures - it is still far more closely
related to contemplation than reason.
However once again insofar as the
structures of development are presented in an objective manner (though in truth
reflecting intense subjective reflection) there is the first radial separation
of what is external and internal.
Q However you believe that despite what has been achieved in some ways
experience at this level can remain very limited. Can you explain?
PC Again I am dealing with just one type
of possible development (where an extreme degree of specialisation takes place
with respect to the contemplative dimension).
Because of perhaps considerable confinement in the dark depths of the unconscious, over a lengthy period of time, one can
lose significant touch with “normal” reality. Though there is now some slight
easing with respect to one’s former situation, paradoxically it is only now (in
view of this light) that one can appreciate how limited one’s experience has
actually become.
It is futile therefore - from an overall
perspective - to think of oneself as “better” or “worse” than others. Though
one may in certain respects have talents that are more strongly developed than
others, specialisation with respect to these talents entails less development
in many other areas. This is why genuine humility - which is the special
hallmark of successful development at this stage - is so necessary to maintain
balance and perspective without ever being especially elated or discouraged by
one’s achievements (or any one’s else’s either!).
So at this level an ability to reflect
on the universal dimensions of reality may contrast sharply with one’s capacity
to become actively involved in this reality.
I will use a simple analogy that might
help. When one enters a cinema initially it may seem so dark that one has
difficulty in determining one’s surroundings. It is like this somewhat as one
traverses the higher contemplative levels. Then after a while as one adjusts to
this new darkness, general landmarks and objects become more visible around one
(without yet being seen in proper light).
Likewise at this level because of the
adjustment that has now taken place with respect to the contemplative stages,
one can “see” a little better around one (but not yet in a proper light). Thus
at a local level one perform tasks and responsibilities within one’s immediate
radius of competence (as it were). However the limited nature of such activity
can contrast sharply with the universal dimensions of the contemplative vision.
So this remains the challenge throughout
the radial levels i.e. to achieve a more fitting active expression of an
overall vision that is deeply contemplative.
Q. Before leaving this level, as it is one of your special concerns can
you say something briefly regarding the distinctive nature of science that is
associated with this level?
PC Though we are now embarking on the
radial levels entailing the balanced combination of both linear (analytic) and
circular (holistic) understanding, again coming from the strongly contemplative
direction, R1 is still more holistic than analytic in character.
In other words R1 is especially suited for
clarification of the fundamental holistic features relating to all the major
stages of development with the appropriate analytic ability (now restored) to
convey these in a clear objective fashion.
So once more it follows from such
understanding that distinctive paradigms (or rather metaparadigms) of science
are associated with each of the major levels. The special quality of R1 is then
an ability to clarify the philosophical nature of each of these metaparadigms (including
in diminished manner the more advanced radial levels) and then convey the
general nature of the scientific approach associated with each level.
So the scientific approach of R1 is of
an especially integrative nature in that it explicitly can recognise the valid role
for a wide variety of scientific approaches (reflecting the corresponding
understanding of the various levels of the overall spectrum of understanding).
The fundamental basis of R1 scientific
understanding is the recognition of the “Theory of Everything” in the manner
that ultimate reality - in physical and psychological terms - is
fundamentally governed by the operation of three sets of polar opposites (that
are complementary or separate depending on circumstances).
So or example with respect to Physics,
the Theory of Everything - which can be given a coherent mathematical
interpretation in terms of the holistic interpretation of the binary digits 1
and 0 - serves as the appropriate means for the integral interpretation of the
relationship as between forces, dimensions and distinct object phenomena.
However, because analytic - as opposed
to holistic understanding - is based on the separation of these same opposites,
its observed relationships increasingly exhibit asymmetrical features. The task
then is to preserve the nature of increasingly detailed analytic inquiry (where
poles become separated) with an overall integrative holistic approach (where
they are understood as complementary).
And this requires a new kind of complex
science where both the real (analytic) and imaginary (holistic) aspects are
explicitly incorporated with each other.
Put another way it requires a scientific
approach where rational analytic inquiry is simultaneously imbued with a deeply
contemplative appreciation of reality.
So this task starts with R1. Again though
a proper integrative framework for scientific investigation has now been set,
the approach is still much more contemplative than rational.
Q And presumably this thinking would permeate a Radial 1 scientific
approach in relation to any other discipline e.g. Economics?
PC Yes indeed! Though analysis of any
economic issue for example necessarily entails the separation of polarities
(such as objective and subjective) leading to asymmetrical type relationships,
at a deeper level these poles are complementary and ultimately identical. So a
radial approach requires the ready facility to keep switching as between two
distinct types of understanding that are not directly compatible in terms of
each other. Though again at this stage, such switching takes place in a
somewhat limited fashion (where the relatively independent role of reason is
still somewhat restricted)!
R2 (Radial 2) - Mature Vision
Q Once again bearing in mind that
we are still chiefly interested in the special relationship as between the
physical and psychological manifestations of this stage can you now outline the
main features of R2 (from your particular perspective)?
PC R2
entails in fully mature fashion - what can be referred to as - the rebirth of
the emotional self. In other words, affective experience that had long since
been deadened of any active expression due to a long felt need for continual
purification of ones deepest emotional instincts is now gradually rekindled in
a universal feeling of compassion for suffering humanity.
Thus the
suffering that one may have long silently endured in a deeply inward fashion (especially
with respect to the affective dimension) now finds a different focus as
experience of the suffering that is universal with respect to all mankind. And
the gradual discovery of this active social dimension to suffering is
experienced as a generalised feeling of universal compassion for all creation.
However,
once again the existential dimension is experienced more keenly than ever in
that one’s active ability to communicate such compassion in contingent local
circumstances may still be very restricted. So there always remains the
ultimately irreconcilable dilemma that what potentially speaks of the universal
and infinite can only be actively channelled in a necessarily limited finite
manner.
This
highlights the key feature of R2 which represents the attempt to bridge more
adequately the relationship as between whole and part (and part and whole) with
respect to all one’s experience. Thus one increasingly experiences the need to
express the contemplative vision (of what is universal and whole) in a relevant
- though necessarily limited - active
manner relating to contingent finite aspects of overall reality.
So the
harmony which has been largely attained with respect of the reconciliation of
whole and part in a contemplative manner now extends to the growing attempt to
achieve this same harmony in active terms.
In other
words the task now is to marry the contemplative vision to an active
involvement with reality in the most fruitful manner possible.
And of
course this equally entails successfully balancing both the physical and
psychological aspects of experience.
Too much
emphasis for example with respect to the (external) physical dimensions of the world
would gradually erode one’s established contemplative equilibrium. Equally
however any attempt to maintain such equilibrium while ignoring the need for
active involvement would be now doomed to failure. So again the important
requirement is to find an appropriate balance – which is unique to each
individual - as between both aspects.
I have
referred to this stage as “Mature Vision". Just as in secular life e.g. various sports,
high achievement is usually preceded by a long-held dream of eventual success,
likewise in spiritual terms. So often especially with a gifted proponent a
clear view may form during this stage of what particular activity (or
activities) can best express the contemplative vision. This then can act in
turn as a considerable catalyst for any necessary further transformation
required to fulfil that special dream.
Q. Given that your main intention in this
approach of the stages of development is the adoption of an appropriate
scientific approach (based on an enhanced appreciation of mathematical symbols)
can we now deal with the specific cognitive aspect of R2!. How does it manifest
itself at this level?
PC From a
cognitive perspective a greatly enlarged vision of radial science now becomes
possible. What this means in effect is that one can experience a renewed facility
for increasingly detailed analytical investigation of various disciplines, while
equally preserving the holistic capacity to coherently integrate this diverse
understanding, both within and between disciplines.
Thus a
much better marriage of the rational analytic capacity with the intuitive
contemplative vision is now possible.
To
preserve this balance of the analytic and holistic now requires that (linear) rational
understanding itself take place in a much more refined fashion where
substantial balance is maintained as between both the (internal) psychological
and – relatively – (external) physical aspects of understanding. This in turn
greatly facilitates the preservation of an unattached attitude with respect to
the dualistic appreciation of symbols.
So for
example in the understanding of a scientific “object” (which externally
manifests itself in experience) one clearly recognises that this “object” has
essentially no meaning in the absence of the counterbalancing mental perception
of the “object” phenomenon (that manifests itself in a - relative - internal
psychological manner). So a pattern of balanced dynamic switching as between
both physical and psychological aspects can take place eroding dualistic
attachment to either aspect (in isolation).
Q. I understand that you are
presently uncovering an exciting new radial mathematical way of providing the
basic scientific structure of R2. Though this is necessarily a complex area
that cannot be outlined in a few paragraphs can you briefly try to elaborate?
PC Yes!
In earlier work, I attempted to find a radial mathematical manner of
structuring the three levels of the Upper Intermediate Band through use of the
mysterious Euler Identity (perhaps the most remarkable relationship in all
Mathematics). However this gradually led on to investigation of what is known
as the Riemann Zeta Function (with which is associated the most famous unsolved
problem in Mathematics i.e. the Riemann Hypothesis).
It gradually
dawned on me that the very problems that make the Riemann Hypothesis appear so
intractable are of a more deeply philosophical than strict mathematical nature.
Thus proper clarification of the true nature of this Hypothesis requires a
radial rather than conventional mathematical approach.
Q I understand that you intend to
go into this issue in more detail elsewhere. However can you briefly comment on
the significance of the Riemann Function for a radial mathematical mapping of
R2?
PC It
ultimately pertains to the fundamental nature of what is meant by a prime
number. From a linear (analytic) perspective, prime numbers appear the most
independent of all serving as the basic building blocks of the natural number
system. Thus, all natural can be uniquely expressed as the product of one or
more prime numbers.
However
equally from a circular (holistic) perspective, the primes are the most
interdependent and are intimately connected with the natural number system through
their location. This aspect is highlighted for example in attempts to fully
understand the distribution of the prime numbers.
The problem
with conventional mathematics however is that it can only attempt to deal with
each aspect separately using just one logical system, so that the fundamental
nature of a prime number is thereby significantly reduced.
In other
words a prime number, by its very nature, inextricably combines both linear
(analytic) and circular (holistic) aspects that relate to differing logical
systems.
So the
nature of prime numbers cannot be understood - except in a very reduced manner -
through use of a mathematical approach based on just one logical system i.e.
linear asymmetrical either/or type of understanding.
Q Let me briefly attempt to
illustrate the two systems! According to linear (either/or) logic, for example,
a number must be either positive or negative; however in terms of circular
(both/and) logic, a number is both positive and negative (with these opposite
complementary opposites now having a merely relative validity)?
PC Yes!
And this can be used to demonstrate the ultimate (circular) equality of form
and emptiness. For when we look at form (in holistic terms represented as 1) in
complementary fashion we obtain 1 – 1 = 0! We can also simply illustrate the
nature of duality (based on the linear separation of opposites) So here 1 + 1 =
2 (which in holistic terms implies duality!
Whereas
conventional (analytic) mathematics is largely based on linear (either/or)
logic, holistic mathematics by contrast entails the dynamic complementarity of
circular (both/and) logic.
Thus
radial mathematics - entailing a balanced mix of both forms of understanding -
is properly required to interpret the nature of prime numbers.
Though
this has been my philosophical position now for many years, it is only recently
that I have been able to better relate such understanding to what is
conventionally known - in strict mathematical terms - about the prime numbers.
The
Riemann Zeta Function is an enlargement of an earlier important series
associated with Euler which relates the sum of a series involving the natural
numbers to another product series that uses the primes.
Whereas the Euler series is only defined for real number powers (of the natural nos.) >
1, the Riemann Zeta Function extends this series to all complex powers (real
and imaginary) except 1. This then enables even closer links to be established relating
to the distribution of prime numbers (among the natural).
However,
the very manner of extending the domain of definition to all complex powers
(except 1) leads to very interesting problems regarding interpretation of new
results for the series thereby generated.
For
example in conventional linear terms, when we obtain the sum of the natural
number series 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 +….. it
diverges to infinity.
However
the sum of this series using the (extended) Riemann Zeta Function is finite =
- 1/12.
So the
question then arises as how to reconcile this new (unexpected) result with
conventional (linear) understanding of number behaviour.
And what
became steadily more apparent to me in studying this matter, is that the
Riemann Zeta Function actually entails differing modes of interpretation (based
on distinct forms of logic).
Some of
these results e.g. real powers of n > 1 (as in the Euler series) basically
entail linear modes of interpretation (that conform to conventional
expectations regarding number behaviour).
Other
results e.g. the so-called trivial zeros for negative even powers -2, -4, -6,
etc. entail purely circular modes of interpretation (that conform to a logic
based on the dynamic complementarity of opposites).
Yet other
results e.g. the especially important non-trivial zeros entail a composite mix
of both linear and circular modes of interpretation. Strictly speaking such
results can only be consistent (in terms of each other) when the sum of series
(entailing both modes) = 0.
In fact
this is exactly the same problem that arises when we try to reconcile the
(linear) diameter of a circle with its circumference. It is only when we shrink
the area of the circle to zero that the diameter becomes identical with the
circumference.
Q And what has all this to do with
prime numbers?
The
relevance of this finding to prime numbers is that by their very nature, the linear
is ultimately indistinguishable from the corresponding circular aspect.
It might
help to appreciate this better by reflecting on the nature of primitive
instinctive behaviour (which provides the appropriate dynamic psychological
context for understanding the nature of what is prime). The very essence of
such behaviour is that both conscious and unconscious aspects of understanding
remain completely confused with each other. Therefore specific objects of
desire (amenable to conscious appreciation) cannot be distinguished from the
holistic dimensional aspect of experience (amenable to unconscious
understanding). So when behaviour is purely primitive, as in the earliest
moments of human development, objects and dimensions remain so dynamically
unstable that they cannot be distinguished from each other. Thus only a primitive
void can be experienced!
However
it requires understanding appropriate to the other mature extreme of experience
- where objects and dimensions are fully differentiated yet properly integrated
with each other - to unravel the true nature of this prime understanding.
So from a
dynamic holistic psychological point of view, we can interpret the Riemann Zeta
Function as entailing comprehensive mappings relating to the natural world with
respect to the full range of both conscious (real) and unconscious (imaginary)
aspects of experience. And this is
exactly the type of experience that unfolds with R2.
However
the maintenance of appropriate integration at this level requires that due balance
is preserved as between a spiritual contemplative vision and the various
phenomena of form (both real and imaginary) that continually arise in
experience.
So the
proper reconciliation of these phenomena (relating to distinctive logical
systems) requires a deep spiritual underpinning in the ability to continually
return to zero i.e. emptiness (in the restoration of a pure spiritual
equilibrium).
Putting
it another way, the integral ability to dualistically experience the world of
form (in conscious terms) equally requires the deep cleansing of all primitive
instinctive behaviour (from an unconscious perspective). Otherwise all the
complex phenomenal structures of experience (organised from prime components)
would be subject to a degree of contamination in the form of unconscious
attachment (remaining hidden at a conscious natural level)
Thus without
such primitive cleansing it would be impossible to maintain spiritual peace
(i.e. return to a state of phenomenal zero). In like manner the quantitative zeros
(where both linear and circular interpretations of number behaviour coincide)
are vital for the interpretation of prime numbers.
However
this always remains of a merely approximate nature. Just as one can get ever closer
to spiritual peace through increasing control of primitive instincts, leading
to restoration of a zero qualitative state of spiritual equilibrium, likewise
one can approximate ever closer to the true distribution of prime numbers
(through the increased ability to incorporate the contribution of “higher”
level quantitative zeros).
Q How do you distinguish as
between the trivial and non-trivial zeros?
PC This
is a very interesting point which is related to a slightly modified definition,
I have made recently of what is a prime number.
In the
deepest sense the two numbers 1 and 0 are the most prime. Quite literally the
word prime is derived from the Latin word “primus” which means first. So 1 in
this sense combined with 0 as the original number are the fundamental primes.
The numbers then - conventionally referred to as prime i.e. 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, etc.
- are “secondary” primes. The trivial zeros are then directly tied up with the
fundamental primes where in general terms (linear) form is reconciled with
(circular) emptiness.
In psychological
terms this facilitates a general contemplative approach where the most primitive
instincts are reconciled with natural experience (which I identify with R1).
The
non-trivial zeros relate to the secondary primes. Again in psychological terms
these relate to the effect of specific primitive instincts that arise through
direct involvement with natural phenomena and which threaten overall
contemplative equilibrium. So the successful harmonisation of such instincts
again requires attaining the zero state (where phenomenal attachment of either
a voluntary or involuntary nature is nullified).
This then
enables deeper immersion in the purer contemplative state (related to the
trivial zeros).
Not all
who attain to a pure contemplative state are destined to become subsequently
immersed (through a non-attached manner) in active involvement.
Substantial
experiential mastery of the trivial zeros in qualitative terms does not ensure
equal mastery with respect to the non-trivial zeros. However mastery of the
non-trivial zeros does facilitate return to a purer (and more balanced)
contemplative equilibrium.
Q So you are recasting the Riemann
Zeta Function in radial terms as a dynamic psychological model of both
quantitative and qualitative number behaviour which has special relevance to R2!
What is the physical counterpart of this model?
PC Well! The
dynamic relevance of the physical aspect has already been better appreciated in
the recognition that at the sub-atomic level of realty, particle behaviour in some
important respects conforms to what is predicted by the Riemann Zeta Function.
Physical nature
with respect to its intrinsic behaviour at the sub-atomic levels, becomes ever more
primitive (i.e. chaotic) with both object and dimensional stability
increasingly short-lived.
However
what is greatly lacking is any true appreciation of what these findings entail
for Mathematics. In other words the key reason why the “proof” of fundamental
hypotheses with respect to prime numbers remains so elusive is that the linear
logic of conventional mathematics is inappropriate to grapple with the very
nature of primes. Though admittedly a great deal of progress as to the
quantitative nature of prime numbers has been made it is largely of a reduced
nature (that lacks corresponding qualitative appreciation).
Therefore
the problems associated with prime numbers demonstrate the ultimate need for a complex
radial approach to mathematics. This properly can incorporate both a real
aspect based on linear logic (of a directly quantitative nature) and an
imaginary aspect based on circular logic (of a directly qualitative
nature).
Q Briefly why do all the
non-trivial zeros lie on the real line = ½?
PC Again
the answer is directly related to the question of how to reconcile line and circle.
Imagine a
circle with line diameter = 1. Then the non-dimensional point at the centre - which
is common to both - will lie at ½.
Again in
psychological terms this refers to the fact that the harmonisation of “new”
primitive instincts – which inevitably resurface through increased active
involvement in reality - requires that a fine balance be maintained as between
external and internal polarities. Though ultimately these are complementary in
spiritual terms, phenomenal recognition requires that they be temporarily
separated in a dualistic manner.
Thus
avoiding undue attachment to either pole requires that both be equally emphasised.
Without this balance, one will either over identify with what is external (thus
losing true objectivity with respect to the world) or alternatively over identify
with what is internal (thus losing true subjectivity with respect to the self).
Equal
balance with respect to both (horizontal) real poles then enables true
complementarity relating to the imaginary projections (arising from the
unconscious).
In other
words as experience becomes progressively more refined, any momentary
“high-level” imaginary attachment to what is deemed spiritual, is immediately
cancelled out by complementary recognition of its corresponding “low-level”
physical equivalent.
Thus the
process of avoiding undue pride (through appreciation of ever more refined
spiritual symbols) is thereby kept in check though a corresponding deep rooted
humility (at the clear recognition of one’s weakness in the face of the
promptings of - yet unreformed - physical nature).
And the
key to this imaginary circular balancing of complementary (vertical) opposites
is through the refined dualistic linear balancing in real terms of (horizontal)
opposites.
And when
both aspects are combined - in real and imaginary terms - true spiritual
equilibrium can be restored.
The very
nature of a primitive instinctive response is that it has become momentarily
independent and thereby cut off from the rest of experience. The problem is
then compounded through the confused identification of what is spiritual
(relating to integration and holistic interdependence) with such a specific
response.
So the
task of speedily re-establishing peace (as a state of spiritual zero) requires
that one can immediately recognise that what initially appears as primitive is in
fact intimately bound up with all of one’s natural experience. Thus in this
very recognition, primitive attachment is lost through the - now - truly
organised recognition of natural phenomena.
And as we
have seen this process requires the balancing of opposite real polarities in
dualistic terms enabling the complementary balancing of unconscious projections
from an imaginary perspective.
There are
exact parallels here with the nature of prime numbers.
A
specific prime number seems the most independent (linear) type of number
possible (with no factors). However from the corresponding holistic (circular) perspective
the location of all prime numbers is inseparable from the natural number system.
Thus
resolving the true nature of prime numbers requires resolving this paradoxical
relationship of linear and circular notions.
And at
the centre of the relationship between the line and the circle is the midpoint
common to both (through which both are reconciled). And just as the line is
literally one-dimensional, the midpoint is ½ of this dimension.
So this
is the simple though very profound reason why all the non-trivial zeros lie on
the real line (= ½).
Only in
this way can the inherent linear and circular nature of prime numbers be
properly reconciled. Here the prime numbers are the most linear and independent
of all numbers (from which the natural numbers are derived). Equally they are the
most circular and interdependent (so that their precise location intimately
depends on the natural numbers).
Q Finally, briefly what can we say
about the volitional aspect at H2?
PC We now
have the increasing interpenetration of both the absolute moral vision (in
continual fidelity to the Spirit) and the relative expression of specific
morals (in the contingent phenomenal circumstances of life).
Both of
these are intimately related to each other. The absolute moral vision provides
the basis for that capacity of true discernment in all decision-making.
Equally,
the authentic making of decisions enhances the quality of absolute commitment
to the Spirit.
And of
course this has matching physical and psychological aspects. Thus, each objective
act (externally) is balanced by an appropriate subjective intention (internally).
However
this does not mean that it is easy. For being true to the Spirit can sometimes
lead to considerable conflict with popular notions.
R3 (Radial 3) – Creative Transformation
Q We move now on to R3. Again what are the key characteristics of this
level?
PC R3 represents the most advanced
mature expression of experience where increasingly committed active involvement
in reality is continually integrated through a deep contemplative vision. So, at this stage one’s active involvement
serves as a fitting expression of the contemplative vision attained.
This enables the finest expression of
the relationship between stages as self(hood) and stages of reality to unfold
where the psychological and physical aspects of the world intimately interpenetrate
with each other.
This entails the mature ability to
properly differentiate the (rational) analytic understanding of both aspects as
relatively independent of each other with the corresponding (intuitive)
holistic appreciation of their ultimate interdependence.
In turn it facilitates the most active
committed type of involvement in the world of phenomenal reality with a view to
its continual spiritual transformation.
Of course no one can live this stage in the
most complete manner (which would require the total spiritual transformation of
phenomenal creation). However it can be approximated to in various ways with
perhaps the best witness provided by the saints and sages of the great mystical
religions.
My own concern of course here is more
limited and concerned primarily with the structural implication of this stage
in cognitive terms for a comprehensive scientific understanding of reality.
However the full development of mental
capacity cannot be achieved in the absence of equal development with respect to
both affective and volitional aspects.
So we are moving here to the ideal of
integrated balanced development with respect to the key primary modes so that
wisdom (cognitive), compassion (affective) and love for all created beings
(volitional) can be combined.
Q How would you describe the
science that is especially appropriate to the R3 level?
PC Bear in mind that I would not in any
way describe my current approach as representative of this level! As I have
stated many times before I would see it as a (preliminary) representation of
the scientific approach associated with R1. However because of a
necessary interaction as between all levels, it is sill possible to give a
reduced account (from the perspective of R1) of the more advanced stages.
So we can describe R3 science as the
fullest integrated expression of both the mature holistic (contemplative) and
analytic (rational) approaches to reality. This would enable understanding
therefore that can be give a very detailed interpretation of any specific area under
attention while enabling such interpretation to be properly integrated with an
overall holistic view of “seeing” reality that is ultimately spiritual.
Though these facets are also developed
to a considerable extent at R2, the special additional contribution of R3 is to
imbue this understanding with a missionary quality in the ardent desire (and
developed ability) to communicate this worldview with others.
Q So you would not distinguish the “good news” of an integrated
scientific vision from the more traditional religious approach in seeking
conversion to God (or whatever is deemed to represent ultimate spiritual
reality)?
PC No! Of course the religious
dimension - as more narrowly understood - is indeed extremely important. However we cannot
divorce this aspect from scientific and artistic means of obtaining meaning.
Though religion in its purest mystical
expressions represents in its greatest proponents the volitional capacity that
would be appropriate to R3, it is my strong contention that both science and
art (as representative directly of the cognitive and affective aspects) are
still greatly undeveloped with respect to the appropriate advanced expressions
of the radial levels.
Indeed - though necessarily in a very
limited fashion - the main driving force behind most of my own writing is an
attempt to convey some insight into the structures of the scientific worldviews
that would be appropriate to the more advanced stages of understanding (beyond
the middle levels).
Though it is very unfortunate indeed,
the scientific and to a lesser extent artistic quest for meaning is often seen
as ultimately incompatible with pure spiritual intent.
However this is due to a cultural
appreciation in of these areas which is firmly rooted in a somewhat linear
appreciation of the middle levels.
However notions of science and indeed of
art can potentially be greatly widened to properly embrace understanding
appropriate to all the levels. Therefore when the cognitive and affective
aspects are properly raised (without reductionism) to an R3 appreciation, then
science and art will thereby become truly inseparable from the traditional
religious quest for meaning (with all speaking - from their varied perspectives
- of the same Spirit).
Q So what would be your ideal model of a great future sage representing
the R3 stage of development?
PC Though it will always be only
possible to approximate to the more advanced features of such a level (as
humans are always limited in various ways) such a person would possess the
qualities of wisdom, compassion and most of all love for all created beings to
a considerable degree. Now one might argue that some of the great religious
figures in history already have demonstrated such qualities (even to a heroic
extent). However the essential distinction that I would make is that in this
sage of the future it will no longer be possible to separate the religious
aspect from the equally important scientific and artistic elements. So with
such a sage, scientific and artistic conversion to an appropriate spiritual experience
will be equally as important as the traditional religious element.
Q So such a sage could be noted as a great scientist or perhaps a great
artist?
PC Yes! Though it is important to
remember that we are talking about very distinctive types of science and art
(that are directly inspired by the understanding appropriate to the most
advanced levels). So the ultimate goal for such a person in seeking to convert
others (in religious, scientific or artistic terms) would be to attain the same
experience of Spirit of which these all now speak.
Q We have talked before of the significance of the Riemann Zeta function -
when given both real (analytic) and imaginary (holistic) philosophical
interpretations – as a means of modelling the structures of the radial levels
(especially R1 and R2).
Has this approach any significance for R3?
PC I suspect it has though I am
wandering here into territory which I have not yet properly explored.
We have already given a brief radial
interpretation of the significance of the trivial zeros (for R1) and the
non-trivial zeros (for R2) respectively. However we have a whole vast network
of other complex values for the zeta function (which are not zero). Now I would
see these other values as being especially appropriate for R3.
Again the sequence of natural numbers
(on which the seta function is based) is symbolic of the linear approach. So
understanding (at the middle levels) is heavily based on such real (rational)
understanding. However this understanding becomes slowly transformed at the
more advanced levels where experience takes place in complex dimensions i.e.
allowing for the interpenetration of both the real (conscious) and imaginary
(unconscious) aspects of reality. Now the consideration of the zeros of the
zeta function relates to the need for continual non-attachment in dealing with
the manifestations of complex phenomena (pertaining to the relationship between
conscious and unconscious in understanding).
However at R3, considerable freedom from
such attachment will have been attained.
Therefore one can embrace without fear
the indirect phenomenal manifestations of Spirit (in all their complex
variations) corresponding to the holistic interpretation of the non zero
solutions to the zeta function.
Q Returning briefly to the physical and psychological aspects of this
level as stages of self(hood) and reality, can you go a little more deeply into
what is involved in maintaining equilibrium?
PC Once again as my present understanding
is grounded in - what I would see as an R1 interpretation - I can only give a
somewhat reduced interpretation of this process (i.e. from the perspective of
R1).
As we have seen that though internal and
external appear to have clear unambiguous meanings (from a partial analytic
perspective), from the holistic integral perspective they are complementary
opposite poles (and ultimately identical).
Reconciling these two perspectives
(analytic and holistic) requires that both internal and external understanding
are properly balanced by their mirror opposite aspects with respect to both
real (conscious) and imaginary (unconscious) manifestations.
This in fact entails that every
phenomenon that is differentiated according to one pole (external) is quickly
understood as having an opposite (internal) meaning and also every internal an
opposite (external) meaning. In this way attachment to either pole (as
separate) is quickly eroded leading to their common realisation as Spirit. Then
such spiritual understanding (in advanced contemplative awareness) becomes the
very means of fuelling awareness of additional partial phenomena in balanced
manner with respect to both aspects. This then enables understanding that can
be immensely active with respect to the detailed understanding of various
phenomena while also remaining deeply spiritual in pure contemplative
awareness.
Q Though we have been speaking mainly here of R3 from a discrete linear
perspective (i.e. as the most advanced of all stages) it is important also to
bear in mind its continuous circular aspect (as interdependent with all other
stages). Can you briefly recap therefore on the nature of such interdependence?
PC Indeed! It is important to bear n
mind that I am speaking of R3 mainly from the passive perspective where
specialisation of the higher (and complementary) stages outweighs that of
linear development. So the task then is to gradually bring this integral
contemplative experience of higher and lower (and lower and higher) stages into
a dynamic fruitful relationship with the - comparatively - less specialised
middle stages.
So - again from this perspective - at R1,
reconciliation of the diagonal polarities, in proper balancing of both the
immanent and transcendent aspects with linear understanding takes place. This
leads to a contemplative perspective on reality that is eternal and universal
yet a phenomenal understanding that remains very immediate and localised. So
the significant problem of finding a better active phenomenal expression of the
degree of contemplative awareness already attained remains.
Then at R2 significant progress with
respect to additional reconciliation of the vertical polarities of whole and
part with the middle levels can take place. Thus while experience still remains
deeply contemplative, more active immersion in the world of phenomenal form can
occur with greater clarity as to the general nature of such involvement and the
detailed practical implementation necessary to realise one’s chosen goals.
Finally at R3 the full reconciliation of
remaining horizontal polarities with the middle levels can also occur. This
enables highly dynamic involvement in affairs entailing suitable balance as
between both the (external) physical and (internal) psychological dimensions.
However it is in the very nature of
experience that when approached from the passive contemplative side that the
degree of fruitful active involvement with reality - even at R3 - will tend to
remain somewhat limited (with the contemplative dimension remaining dominant).
Though I have not specifically dealt
with the radial levels from the alternative - and more frequent perspective -
of experience that relatively more grounded in the middle levels that in
contemplation, it is easy enough to characterise the general nature of
development which is now characterised by the need to progressively integrate
the specialised experience of the middle levels with growing contemplative
awareness. R1 would here be largely confined with the reconciliation of the middle
with the subtle levels of H1 (and complementary L1) respectively. Then R2 would
gradually incorporate the more refined causal contemplative awareness of H2
(and L2). Finally R3 would now include the most refined nondual awareness of H3
(and L3) with the phenomenal understanding of the middle levels.
However once again when one approaches
the radial stages from the specialised dualistic grounding of the middle
stages, it is unlikely that full development in pure contemplative awareness
will be attained.
Thus the most fruitful experience of R3
is more likely to unfold in the comparatively few cases where it is entered
from an experience (where both the dual and nondual levels have already attained
advanced - but balanced - development). In such cases a more creative and
dynamic type of experience is likely to unfold entailing the twin processes of
further reconciling contemplation with active involvement and from the other
perspective such active involvement with contemplative awareness.
In the
rare cases where this process is fully successful, (refined) form and emptiness
remain on a fairly equal footing continually servicing each other. Thus the
detailed and enriched engagement with form serves as the basis for continual
transformation in the pure spiritual energy of emptiness: equally such
emptiness serves as the basis for the continual creation of new transient
worlds of refined form.
Q. Finally what about the three
phases of R3 (that you have already mentioned in an earlier discussion on the
levels of development)?
PC Briefly,
the first of these phases would entail the fullest flowering of the
relationship between the internal (psychological) aspect of self and the
external (physical) aspect of the world.
The next
stage, with greater problems and suffering in evidence, would probably lead to
a stronger focus on the internal aspect with the final stage even lessening
emphasis on this pole in a return to more purely contemplative awareness
experienced in the midst of negative form (i.e. with continual greater
suffering relating to both physical and psychological aspects likely to be in
evidence).
However
we cannot be too precise here as individual experience and temperament can vary
greatly.
No comments:
Post a Comment