9. Levels as States: Levels as Structures (B)

Lower Middle Levels

Q. Can we now move onto the middle levels! What features characterise the states and structures of these levels?

PC Though appropriate development of the middle levels we attain the specialised use of conscious type understanding.

With respect to states it implies that the three types, waking, dream and sleep, are clearly separated with the waking now dominant (in terms of conscious activity).

With respect to structures we can express this by saying that the three fundamental polarities (horizontal, vertical and diagonal) undergo considerable differentiation with remaining complementary confusion thereby greatly receding.

However because circular complementarity - either of the confused or mature nature - is explicitly ignored through such development, it can have very damaging consequences in terms of overall integration.

Thus with the absence of horizontal (internal-external) complementarity, the physical and psychological aspects of reality can become largely abstracted from each other. Indeed such an attitude underlines the conventional scientific approach with (objective) reality effectively considered as independent of the (subjective) observer.

Likewise with the absence of vertical (whole-part) complementarity, the basic relationship thereby as between the whole and parts of a system is greatly reduced with the whole - in any context - largely understood as the sum of its parts.

Equally the lack of vertical complementarity leads to the erosion of the dynamic links connecting both lower and higher (and higher and lower) levels of development.

In other words experience with respect to these levels is no longer explicitly recognised.

So once again we can see that conventional science is in fact the product of the understanding that typifies the middle band of the spectrum. However because the relevance of other bands is no longer recognised, this can easily lead to the absolutist belief that such understanding constitutes the only valid type of scientific interpretation.

Also the lack of diagonal complementarity leads to the erosion of the dynamic links connecting the world of material form with that of the alternative world of spiritual emptiness.

So again, in the conventional scientific perspective, reality is identified solely with form and is associated with the belief that this can be properly interpreted in a merely rational manner (without reference to spiritual notions). 

This separation of matter and Spirit likewise is associated with the separation of structures and states.

Thus conventional science represents the interpretation of phenomenal form (as merely structure). Though implicitly it may be conceded that the waking state is necessary to consciously appreciate its findings, ultimately these are defined in merely structural terms (without reference to corresponding states).

L0 (Lower 0) - Concrete

Q So what are the main features with respect to structures and states of this level?

PC As we have seen the concrete level emerges from the mythic stages where some degree of confusion as to external/internal polarities remains.

So one is not yet ready to take full (internal) responsibility for moral decision-making but rather invests external symbols with mythical powers.

This is still the case to a considerable extent at the concrete level especially with respect to deeper more generalised aspects of experience. However regarding the specific local areas of activity, specialised development of linear understanding occurs.

This means that a child is now able in understanding to successfully separate opposites with respect to the three main polarities.

So regarding form and emptiness, material phenomena can be separated from spiritual desire. Also, in any relevant context, holistic meaning is no longer confused with specific part phenomena. Rather a somewhat reductionist notion of linear meaning emerges where the whole is identified - in material terms - with the sum of its parts. Finally internal and external polarities are now more clearly separated enabling the child to take a detached objective view of the (external) world that is not confused with (internal) subjective factors.

Therefore in structural terms we have the substantial separation of the three major polarities with respect to local understanding (though in truth this process is never complete).

In corresponding state terms we have the growing emergence - with respect to daytime local activities - of the waking state. What this means in effect is that the conditions for clear conscious interpretation of reality now exist.

Q So you identify the waking state with (mere) conscious interpretation of reality?

PC Yes! In actual experience conscious and unconscious must always interact in varying degrees. Thus the three main states remain - at least potentially - present. However the mark of linear specialisation is the ability to formally interpret reality with respect to the separation of polar opposites. This therefore entails the corresponding ability to view such activity purely in terms of the waking state.

However we must be very careful about the use of such a term as “waking”.

From a nondual perspective, the pure waking state is inseparable from the pure sleep state as the expression of total spiritual awareness. However in dualistic terms the waking and sleep states are opposed (relating to the direct expression of conscious and unconscious respectively) So “waking” here refers to understanding that is of a directly conscious nature (which in turn is most closely associated with the linear use of reason).

So when we allow for the inevitable interaction of both dual and nondual in experience, there is always a (nondual) sense in which all states remain continuously present - in varying degrees - in personality. However equally there is a *dualistic” sense whereby the states are separated in discrete terms. And because we are approaching those stages, where the dualistic aspect attains its specialised expression (at least with respect to daytime activity), “waking” is now most identified with the conscious state necessary for linear type reason to take place.

Once again however it is important to recognise that the state aspect is considered neutral at this level with respect to the linear cognitive structures that unfold.

Thus, though implicitly the waking state is necessary for conscious interpretation of reality to take place, truth is here directly identified (merely) with the rational structures that unfold.

This indeed is the distinguishing mark of the absolute type of linear understanding which characterises the middle levels.

At all other levels a two-way dynamic interaction is always maintained with respect to both states and structures with truth seen to be of a merely relative nature.

Q Can one have peak experience of higher stages from the middle levels?

PC Certainly yes! Again it is important to recognise that explicitly, linear type reason - characterising the scientific worldview - is based on middle level understanding that does not allow for interaction with other levels. However, implicitly such interaction does still occur (even in cognitive terms).

Also affective and volitional type understanding are less constrained allowing for both lower and higher level influences. Finally with respect to the concrete stage of L0, mythic type understanding - based on confused interaction between lower and higher levels - still takes place.

Therefore because the gradual specialisation of linear understanding tends to erode remaining confusion between vertically complementary levels, a purer relationship between lower and higher levels can thereby take place. So temporary peak experience of a lucid kind with respect to the more advanced higher levels is certainly possible - and indeed even likely - at this stage.

Q Finally what about night time activity at this stage?

PC A complementary relationship as between day time and night time activity now becomes more in evidence.

Because day time active increasingly operates under the influence of the waking state (especially with respect to rational understanding of a conscious kind) night time activity operates in a compensatory fashion where balance with the unconscious can be restored (in a manner appropriate to the level). So just as day time is increasingly associated with waking activity, night time is correspondingly associated with sleep and dream activity.

L0,H0 (Lower 0, Higher 0) - Formal

Q Again what are the main characteristics with respect to states and structures associated with this level?

PC We now have reached the stage where (mere) specialisation of linear type understanding reaches its zenith.

Whereas the previous concrete stage (L0) is confined largely to local interpretation of specific empirical type phenomena, the formal stage extends to the abstract formulation of general type relationships.

This requires in turn that objective and subjective polarities are separated (at least explicitly) to an extreme extent thus allowing speculation of an increasingly universal kind regarding reality.

So this formal stage leads to the elaboration of theoretical structures which can then be applied to fruitful interpretation of vast networks of specific type relationships.

This requires in turn that the waking state - which implicitly is necessary for the understanding of such structures to unfold - is considered not to influence the absolute nature of such structures.  

Q  Can we distinguish the waking state with respect to external and internal understanding respectively?

PC Interesting question! In a qualified sense the answer is yes. However linear understanding can only deal with both of these poles in a detached objective manner. Therefore, such understanding is properly suited for the analytic study of the (external) world in a rational scientific manner.

Though it can also be applied to the internal domain e.g. with respect to moral decisions, by its very nature it operates through attempting to objectify this aspect of understanding. So what is properly subjective can thereby become substantially reduced in an objective manner.

This can for example lead to a somewhat programmatic approach to morality that is identified by adherence to an external set of rules. True subjectivity - relating to a more intuitive sense of personal meaning - cannot however be captured in this fashion. Thus existential factors would more properly relate to an internal subjective approach.

So to sum up, the waking state can be identified with the predisposition required for conscious attention to take place with respect to either external or internal phenomena.  Once more the conscious waking state here corresponds with the linear form of structure through which reality is interpreted. However when used dualistically in an internal direction, subjective is thereby reduced to objective interpretation.

Q How do we distinguish day time from night time experience at this level?     

PC They tend to sharply separate. Day time experience becomes strongly associated - especially with respect to organised rational thinking - with the conscious waking state. However night time experience in complementary fashion becomes associated with (unconscious) sleep as dreaming activity. However this sleep state is not yet of a developed spiritual kind but rather operates in a largely compensatory natural manner (with respect to refreshment of one’s physical being).

H0 (Higher 0) - Vision

Q Again what is the distinguishing feature of both the state and structure aspects of this level?

PC We have now reached the most advanced of the (lower) middle levels. So as well as providing the most developed form yet of linear understanding, it also serves as a bridge to the higher levels (where spiritual intuitive understanding undergoes considerable development).

Though explicitly with respect to the state aspect, (conscious) waking still predominates, implicitly such waking interacts with an underlying dream state (of a spiritual nature). In this way waking consciousness can become considerably inspired by creative imagination (incubating in the unconscious).

In corresponding fashion with respect to structure, though the (rational) linear form of understanding still explicitly predominates, implicitly it becomes imbued with a purer intuitive quality (emanating from the unconscious). This intuition in turn readily facilitates - in the most developed personalities - the creative organisation of vast networks of interlocking ideas.

Thus increasing dynamic interaction with respect to both states and structures is now in evidence. From one perspective the (conscious) waking state becomes imbued with an emerging dream state (of a spiritual kind). Likewise from the corresponding alternative perspective, (rational) linear understanding, based on the separation of dualistic opposites, increasingly cooperates with (spiritual) intuitive understanding (that implicitly speaks of the nondual realm).

Q Does this clash with respect to both states and structures not inevitably lead to conflict in the personality?

PC Very good question! Many personalities are strongly grounded in linear awareness. Thus the emerging intuitive capacity of this level serves to greatly enhance existing understanding of - and adaptation to - rational reality. In such cases the underlying clash as between opposite modes of understanding may never become readily apparent.

Though experience of reality is now significantly fuelled by the creative imagination (based on nondual awareness), such intuitive experience remains largely of an implicit nature that paradoxically serves to enhance (explicit) rational adaptation to reality.

However other personalities are inherently of a more dynamic nature where unconscious influences are never far from the surface of awareness. In such cases a very significant clash may now emerge as between established dualistic adaptation to reality and emerging spiritual intuition pointing to an ultimate nondual state.

In certain circumstances, therefore, the resolution of the growing conflict as between the dualistic and nondual domains of understanding requires substantial explicit development with respect to spiritual intuitive awareness.

So with respect to states, this requires that the (conscious) waking gives way to the developed expression of the spiritual dream and sleep states.

With respect to structures, it also requires that the (rational) linear gives way to a circular paradoxical form of understanding, which ultimately leads to a transparent form (that is purely spiritual). 

And these are the states (and corresponding structures) that we will be examining with both the higher and (upper) middle bands of development.

Q Does the attempted application of waking state (with linear interpretation) to both the external and internal poles of reality have anything to do with the growing conflict of the stage?  

PC Indeed yes! We must remember however that for the majority of personalities such conflict does not dominate experience. Therefore whatever problems may arise, a person remains largely adapted in daytime activity to the (conscious) waking state combined with its rational linear mode of understanding (as structure).

However in those cases where the clash as between the established dualistic and emerging nondual mode of understanding is especially severe, a growing split as between the external and internal poles becomes apparent.

Here, though dualistic interpretation can still operate successfully with respect to the external pole (of the outer world) it increasingly fails with respect to the internal pole (of the inner self). So while still relating successfully to an objective world of relationships based on rational linear interpretation, with respect to the self one may increasingly search for a spiritual meaning that ultimately is of a nondual nature.

Thus when this existential clash is especially severe, a considerable breakdown of one’s relationship with the established world may be necessary before successful progression to the higher levels can take place.

Q Finally what about day time and night time experience of this level?

PC Again there is a substantial split as between day time and night time experience.

At an explicit level, day time experience still remains largely dominated by the (conscious) waking state combined with (rational) linear structures of understanding.

However - as we have seen - implicitly the (spiritual) dream state emerges providing greater creative imagination for the interpretation of various relationships.

Though night time experience is again dominated by physical sleep and compensatory dream activity, the possibility of lucid dreams of a spiritual nature is now greatly increased. Indeed this is the very means by which the dream activity - that hitherto had remained merely implicit with respect to daytime activity - is made explicit. This can arise for example through meaningful messages being communicated through the unconscious regarding the future direction of one’s life.

Higher Levels

H1 (Higher 1) – Psychic/Subtle

Q What is the essential feature of this level with respect to the relationship between states and structures?

PC Interaction takes place in a dynamic manner (thereby facilitating the switch as between the structures and states of several levels in actual experience).

However, in terms of the formal cognitive understanding of the levels of the lower middle band, states are explicitly ignored. As we have seen, interpretation at these levels relates solely to the structural forms that arise in experience.

This tendency is especially in evidence with respect to the scientific and mathematical understanding of the levels.

For example the truth of a mathematical proposition such as the Pythagorean Theorem is identified in absolute terms with the structural form of the relationship (i.e. that in a right angled triangle the square on the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares on the other two sides).

Here the underlying conscious waking state - though necessary for one to experientially confirm the proposition - is considered neutral (with respect to the truth of the proposition).

Q You consider this an extremely important point?

PC Yes indeed! For in conventional terms, (valid) scientific and mathematical understanding is associated solely with the limited understanding that characterises the Lower Middle Band. Of course there clearly is a great value to this type of interpretation which I have no wish to dispute. However over-identification can blind one to the fact that equally important forms of science and mathematics are associated with all of the other bands (excepting perhaps the lowest band where cognitive understanding is insufficiently developed).

And one vital aspect of this enlarged perspective is that structures and states are understood to dynamically interact with each other at these bands.

From this perspective, conventional science (and mathematics) represents an important special case where such interaction is frozen thus enabling a static - and somewhat absolute - consideration of the relationship between chosen variables.

However when we allow explicitly for the interaction of both states and structures, truth is necessarily of a relative nature (comprising both aspects).

Q Can you deal now with the nature of H1(in the context of states and structures)?

PC There are indeed several important sub-levels (which we will consider as we proceed).

However the transition to H1 starts from a certain breaking down of the (conscious) waking state (and its associated structures).

Typically during the Lower Middle Band one is greatly influenced by the shared cultural experience of society (which in Western society is dominated by the rational linear Band). This leads to the definition of goals that can be consciously attained and where achievement in such society is then largely associated with the successful attainment of these goals.

The problem however is that actual experience involves the interaction of both conscious and unconscious aspects. Thus when emphasis is primarily on the conscious aspect, this can lead to a growing imbalance in terms of overall experience. From this perspective there is a considerable dilemma in terms of successful adjustment in many Western societies, as it entails adapting to a cultural experience that is somewhat unbalanced.

Most individuals are not especially sensitive to this imbalance. Therefore they can pursue the well recognized goals esteemed by society without undue personality conflict arising.

However for others a major existential problem may now surface which - though not initially recognized - calls for substantial development of the unconscious aspect of personality.

   

Q What are the symptoms of this existential conflict?

PC Though sometimes the onset can be dramatic - leading perhaps to a temporary nervous breakdown – often it is characterized by a vague but growing sense of disillusionment, whereby one suffers from an increasing inability to find satisfaction from conventional pursuits. Though one may for a time attempt to adapt to conventional expectations, these can bring no real relief.

Thus eventually a crisis point will be reached. Successful resolution here requires finally abandoning hope in one’s conventional goals so as to respond to the authentic needs of Spirit incubating deep within the unconscious.

Then following this resolution a psychological release often follows whereby the Spirit - that had remained hidden in the darkness - is transferred as illumination into one’s conscious experience.

Typically now the world of nature can be seen in an entirely new light. One is no longer an observer but rather a participant as co-creator of what is experienced.

The spiritually refined affective aspect is often first to be activated in a new supersensory form of awareness. However the cognitive aspect likewise becomes intuitively transformed in a refined form of suprarational understanding.

Q So how does this relate to states and structures?

PC The outpouring of illumination relates to the mature version of the (day time) dream state. And quite literally one’s experience can initially seem akin to a very joyful dream state.

Also because the phenomena that arise are so intuitively inspired, the rational structures of understanding - which inform cognitive interpretation at the previous Band - are likewise transformed into a new paradoxical type appreciation.

And the interaction of mature dream state and intuitively inspired paradoxical structures mutually enhance each other.

However a problem now arises in relation to the integration of the dream with the (conscious) waking state and corresponding paradoxical with dualistic structures.

This dream state directly relates to an outpouring of the spiritually refined unconscious into experience while the corresponding paradoxical structures relate to the ultimate nondual nature of reality. So a conflict is likely to arise as between emerging spiritual and older rational appreciation (with their associated nondual and dual interpretations of reality respectively).

However this does not initially happen (due to lack of sufficient spiritual refinement).

Q And how does this conflict manifest itself?

PC The existential period of withdrawal, preceding illumination, represents in spiritual terms, a purgation (or purification) of the faculties.

Here, one gradually learns to withdraw attachment from dualistic phenomena (as possessing intrinsic meaning).

Thus initially when a purer spiritual light returns, one is able to sustain it without difficulty (due to the lengthy cleansing process preceding). However as one becomes accustomed to restoration of the “good times”, accompanied by a new glorious appreciation of phenomena, it gradually leads to difficulties relating to a subtler form of secondary attachment.  

Whereas primary attachment relates directly to phenomena (in themselves), secondary attachment relates to phenomena (as mediators of spiritual light). Therefore in seeking out “spiritual consolations” through phenomena that mediate the Spirit, a dualistic element of possessive attachment is involved which creates barriers in terms of the pure reception of the light.

This signals the need for a further deepening of unconscious capacity which requires the negation of the subtle conscious phenomena characterising experience.

So we have a new purgation or “night” with respect to supersensory activity (which St. John of the Cross refers to as the passive night of sense).

Q So what are the states and structures associated with this new phase? 

Just as the illuminated state relates to a spiritual dream, the corresponding purgation phase can resemble closely - especially in its intense periods - a spiritual nightmare.

Very quickly one’s world is thrown sharply into reverse. Whereas in the previous stage - when bathed in the light - one saw oneself as progressing well in the Spirit, suddenly all can seem lost and one is daily afflicted by all sorts of strange occurrences that emerge from a dark and frightening underworld.

As St. John explains this indeed is the effect of the Spirit that in its concentrated intensity is like a sharp x-ray. This clearly exposes any imperfection that is contrary to its internalised purity so that initially it can be difficult to appreciate any good and one suffers keenly “the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune”.

Initially the emphasis is on the erosion of attachment to the more externalised structures of a paradoxical kind (though of course continued erosion also takes place with respect to the standard linear structures).

However after a period of time, when a sufficient level of purgation has taken place, one gradually adjusts to this new underworld where the positive benefits of what has happened becomes more evident.

Though one remains in darkness the first semblance of a deeper sleep state facilitating the “prayer of quiet” emerges in a more tranquil contemplative manner.

This then becomes associated with internalised paradoxical structures of form that become associated with a more morally responsive type of existential decision making, which entails a keen realisation that in any relevant context a decision entails both objective and internal considerations, which must be balanced in a satisfactory manner.

One can neither take refuge in merely “objective” standards of morality (as for example dictated by one’s religious tradition) nor “subjective” criteria based on personal subjective preferences. Rather both aspects need to be properly balanced with the relevant decision then guided through a faint intuitive signal that comes from sensitive discernment of one’s spiritual conscious. Thus what is “right” or “wrong” is thereby seen as uniquely determined with respect to every situation (which greatly enhances the authentic exercise of faith and true freedom).   

Q To what extent do we now have a mixture of states and structures in experience?

Yes! This is a very good question. Though we are associating the dream (and nightmare) states as typical of the level, clearly one who is going through this stage must also cope with everyday duties that require the conscious waking state. Therefore though many difficulties may arise, due to unresolved conflicts as between these states, clearly both must be used.

And also as we have seen in deeper moments a spiritual sleep state - conducive to true contemplation - may also be present.

So in this sense experience is never confined to just one level. Rather in various ways, the state typical of one level must be integrated with the states of earlier levels. Likewise to a certain degree one is enabled to move forward to experience the state typical of more advanced stages.

It is similar with respect to the structural understanding of phenomenal form.

Though the two-way (internal/external) paradoxical appreciation of complementary opposites most typifies this level (H1), once again everyday duties will still require the standard linear interpretation of dualistic opposites.

Now to some extent one may temporarily withdraw from such duties so as to better facilitate the emergence of the new type of understanding. However - even if possible - it would not be healthy to seek too extreme a withdrawal.

And again to a limited extent one may be enabled to move on to embrace the more refined paradoxical understanding of form that would be typical of the more advanced levels.

Thus in this way, in dynamic experiential terms we see the gradual interpenetration in experience of a growing variety of states and structures.

Q You stressed before how the experience of the (lower) middle band is characterised by understanding that tends to be confined to its own band thereby excluding recognition of other bands (and levels). Can you explain how interaction between levels opens up with H1?

PC One must remember that integration in experience is always of a relative nature, whereby what is mature and appropriate with respect to a “higher” level can only be achieved with reference to the immature (and thereby confused) expression appropriate to the corresponding “lower” level.

Now in direct terms H1 (psychic/subtle) is vertically complementary with L1 (mythic). So the mature understanding appropriate to H1 comes about through unravelling remaining confusion with respect to L1.

Thus when spiritual illumination takes place at the “higher” level of H1, it gradually brings to light the immature elements associated with its complementary level of L1.

Thus when purgation commences, attention quickly transfers from the “higher” to the “lower” level in the attempt to disentangle the remaining confused elements repressed in the unconscious at the early stage. And the only way of successfully unravelling this confusion is through the purity of the spiritual light now attained. So the continual return from “higher” to complementary “ lower” (and likewise from “lower” to “higher”) is a very necessary aspect of healthy spiritual development that enables both “top” down and bottom up” integration of stages to take place.

From one valid perspective the onset of the “higher” spiritual state enables the cleansing of corresponding phenomenal structures. However from an equally valid perspective, the continuing development of such refined structures calls forth the need for ever purer spiritual states.

So structures and states (and states and structures) are dynamically interdependent in experience.

Q  What is the relevance of this interaction as between structures and states for scientific understanding?

PC Conventional science is based on the supposed neutrality of structures and states enabling concentration therefore on the mere structural characteristics of observed phenomena of form.

However the holistic science of the “higher” (and complementary “lower”) levels is more subtle, whereby the dynamic interaction of structures and states (and states and structures) must be preserved.

From a formal perspective, conventional science is a rational pursuit (geared to interpretation of structures of form). Holistic science however explicitly combines both reason and intuition in the appreciation of the dynamic relationship between structures and states.

This type of holistic understanding for example is very necessary for appreciation of the nature of quantum reality (which is the physical counterpart of the L1 level). So here we use the “higher” psychological understanding of H1 to interpret the physical features of the complementary “lower” physical level of L1.

And quantum reality clearly reveals both state and structure aspects. Thus there is an overall holistic state that governs the general interaction of quantum particles which cannot be clearly divorced from the independent observation of such particles.  

Also the apparent paradoxes associated with particle interactions only arise in the context of interpretation based on the linear asymmetrical thinking associated with the middle band. However when correctly interpreted from the standpoint of H1, the general behaviour of quantum particles at L1 now appears intuitively obvious (in terms of the understanding of that level).

Q And briefly what is the relationship as between structures and states with respect to moral decisions at this level?

PC We have already seen how existential choice involves the resolution of paradoxical elements associated with both internal (subjective) and external (objective) structures. The state aspect then relates to a spiritual conscience that is now considerably cleansed and can thereby operate in an intuitive sensitive manner.

The interaction of state and structure then results in a quality of discernment enabling one to take the best decision in the circumstances involved.

Q You would not accept the position - often put forward by the institutional churches - that some moral issues are “objectively” right or wrong in absolute terms!

PC Unfortunately this is exactly the same problem as in science where the world is interpreted as having an “objective” meaning (independent of subjective interpretation).

Clearly if authentic responsibility is to be taken for one’s moral choices in life, the subjective self must be actively involved in an ever changing dialogue with external events. And meaningful moral choice must reflect this dialogue which - from an important perspective - is unique for every individual.

When we truly reflect on any moral area e.g. abortion we perhaps begin to realise how complex the issues really are, where black and white quickly merge with each other into varying shades of gray. Though this complex position - reflecting a certain uniqueness of each individual situation - does not make such issues easier to resolve, it does however allow for the more authentic exercise of moral freedom.

I must stress that we are talking here of what is appropriate for those who are genuinely operating at the H1 level of awareness! Clearly where decisions are taken from the perspective of another level such as the middle band, a different moral stance may be more appropriate (where “right” and “wrong” are portrayed in more absolute terms).

However, this still does pose a major problem for the institutional churches (which is rarely addressed). This relates to the fact that for people at differing stages of development, distinct perspectives for dealing with moral issues will be involved. In other words no single “catch all” approach to morality can be adequate in such circumstances.

Q We have seen that the essence of your approach is to keep matching physical and psychological reality through complementary type relationships. In this context you would see strong parallels as between the existential decision-making of H1 and the quantum reality (appropriate to L1). Can you explain this further now with relation to structures and states?   

PC From the structural aspect there are common features to both of these areas (decision-making and quantum reality) in the paradoxical relationship as between the external and internal poles of reality.

Then the state aspect relates to the spiritual intuitive capacity to clearly discern the overall holistic interdependence of phenomena in both cases. In the end reason is most appropriate for discriminating the - relatively separate - aspects of experience   and spiritual intuition more appropriate for discerning the integral interdependence of all aspects. Thus it requires the intuition appropriate to “higher” spiritual levels to holistically interpret the interdependence of particles at corresponding “lower” physical levels.

Q We are still at the early stages of H1. Can you know briefly summarise its subsequent stages (with respect to structures and states)?   

PC What we have portrayed so far is the first sub-level of H1 (corresponding to the concrete level at the middle previous band).

And as we have seen we have here two distinct directions. Thus to recap, we firstly have the refined positing of phenomena in a new form of supersensory illumination.

Then we have the corresponding dynamic negation of those same phenomena in an intensive period of purgation. Indeed this is the manner in which the focus of attention switches from the conscious to the deeper unconscious regions of personality.

Following this purgation phase we gradually have the emerging of a new refined type of illumination. Whereas the earlier phase was associated more with concrete phenomena, this relates more to the deeper dimensional background containing such phenomena. In this sense this supranational state corresponds to the formal level at the previous middle band.

In structural terms this stage is mainly associated with a deep refined intellectual ability to unravel the fundamental paradoxical structures governing the behaviour of overall reality. In turn this is associated with a purer spiritual dream state (now largely denuded of specific phenomena). So this purer state is especially conducive to appreciation of universal archetypes.

However as before a problem develops whereby secondary attachment builds up both with respect to the structural and state aspects of the stage. This then leads to an even more dramatic purgation or implosion of personality (which St. John refers to as the “passive night of spirit). Once again there is a fascinating physical counterpart to this in the behaviour of “black holes”. So this stage facilitates the appropriate philosophical appreciation of “black holes” while establishing remarkable complementary links with psychological behaviour.

If one is potentially destined to advance to even “higher” spiritual stages, this can be the most difficult of stages to endure with all conscious life seemingly undergoing obliteration while one remains confined for perhaps a considerable period of time to an extremely dark - and often terrifying - underworld. 

Once again after a time extremely refined internal structures unfold that require increasing fidelity of conscience in the exercise of pure faith. These refined internal structures are associated with an equally refined contemplative state. So typically during this period, terrifying upheavals through which remaining conscious phenomena are cleansed, intersperse with periods of profound stillness whereby one dwells in a strangely fulfilling dark and peaceful type of contemplative absorption. So once again this now resembles much more a sleep than dream state.

However eventually even these refined internal structures undergo erosion so that one is left increasingly alone in the dark - seemingly lost - without any remaining conscious supports.

Though from one perspective - corresponding to the third vision level of the previous band – this represents the most deeply contemplative experience yet attained, equally it can be associated with growing unhealthy repression of the primitive instincts of the natural self. So a decisive turn from the transcendent to the more immanent aspect of Spirit may be required if further “higher” stages are to unfold successfully.

Q From what you say - despite all the progress - one cannot successfully reconcile structures and states at the H1 level?

PC We have to be careful with generalisations. As I have stated repeatedly, I am writing from the standpoint of just one possible experience of these stages which inevitably reflects a particular personality type and all its associated idiosyncrasies. However the value of this particular personality type (representing an equal mix of 4 and 5 types in the Enneagram system) is that it is especially well suited to extract (from highly personalised experience) universal features that are then generally applicable to all development. So therefore I am attempting to represent the unique features of one person’s development as faithfully as possible as this is the very climate in which understanding of the universal features applicable to all development emerged. And ultimately these features can be best encoded in a holistic mathematical fashion! 

So I would say that when one is destined to proceed to the prolonged experience of “higher” levels, that states and structures cannot be properly reconciled at H1.

In effect two types of attachment will operate mutually conflicting with each other.

From one perspective undue attachment to the spiritual dream state still exists whereas from the other perspective secondary attachment remains with respect to the circular paradoxical structures of form that arise. So there is still too much attachment to emptiness (on the one hand) and form (on the other). And this reflects a situation where the unconscious is still insufficiently developed to sustain the rapid transformation with respect to conscious dynamics.

It really is only at the next level (H2) that the proper reconciliation of states with structures can take place.

Q. Finally, can you briefly clarify the relationship as between day time and night time experience of states and structures at this level?  

PC As we have seen the day time experience of H1 is characterised by a growing mature dream state (of a spiritual intuitive nature) that contrasts with the corresponding confused state (at L1).  

In reverse fashion though dream would likewise characterise night time experience, occasional a lucid dream state i.e. as if consciously awake while dreaming can arise.

In corresponding fashion, day time experience of H1 is likewise characterised by the emergence of paradoxical structures reflecting the dynamic role of complementary opposites.

However when lucid dream states arise at night time, the clear unobstructed use of linear type understanding may prevail.   

H2 (Higher 2) - Causal

Q Can you explain again briefly the transition to this level?

PC As I have stated many times the manner in which development unfolds is unique for each individual depending among many other factors of personality characteristics.

So the account that I give therefore represents just one particular account that would be more typical of the Personality Type (again in Enneagram terms the 4 with a strong 5 wing). However the value of such an account is that it represents a first person attempt to accurately describe the dynamics of each stage (from the perspective of the actual experiential dynamics undergone at each stage). And as this is the experience through which both Holistic – and more recently Radial – Mathematics has unfolded, it may have special significance in that context. 

As we have seen the previous level culminates in the “dark night” crisis related to an unduly transcendent focus on development. Thus in continually seeking the pure spiritual emptiness (that is not confused with form) one unconsciously - to an extent - thereby represses phenomena of form. So as I would understand it, in the actual dynamics of experience, it is not really possible to undergo a severe spiritual “dark night” episode without the accompaniment of some unhealthy pathological symptoms of depression (due to the unwitting unconscious repression of phenomena of form).

Thus the eventual resolution of the “dark night” may well require a decisive turn in spiritual terms i.e. from an unduly transcendent to a more immanent direction.

In other words from a stance that had long been dominated by the conscious need for continual spiritual discipline, one now learns to relax more thereby letting the unconscious speak for itself.

So whereas H1 can be defined as the spiritual transformation of conscious understanding, H2 in corresponding fashion represents - more directly - the spiritual transformation of the unconscious.

As the unconscious can only manifest itself in phenomenal terms in an indirect manner whereby it is projected into consciousness, initially considerable confusion may exist whereby attachment to these “virtual” or “imaginary” phenomena (both in “high” and “low” terms) may be in evidence.

“High level” projections are generally identified with the more intuitive universal type meaning associated with the release of archetypal spiritual forms.

“Low Level” projections - by contrast - are associated with the corresponding release of instinctive physical desires e.g. erotic fantasies.

In vertical terms both these “high” and “low” types of unconsciously projected phenomena are in fact strongly complementary, thus the integral two-way unification in experience of the “higher” and “lower” levels of experience requires the gradual erosion of undue attachment to all unconscious projections.

If the previous level of H1 culminates in a prolonged severe “dark night” experience extending perhaps over several years, then a lengthy period of recovery may be required before H2 (causal) level can properly unfold.

So what happens now is that the unconscious initially projects into experience is a somewhat dualistic manner.

Indeed this may serve a very valuable function enabling one to gradually obtain a foothold once more in the conventional pursuits of living. So for a while one may feel gratitude as former social and work skills - which had become severely eroded during the previous level - are once more restored. Indeed for a time one may look back on the previous harrowing experiences of the “dark night” as a strange aberration that thankfully has now passed.

However if the previous spiritual experience was of a truly authentic nature, one will not remain long satisfied with this seeming adaption to “normal” living. During the previous stage one had become significantly stripped of direct attachment to conscious (i.e. “real”) phenomena. Therefore the phenomena that now arise are largely of an unconscious (i.e. imaginary) nature pertaining to the more holistic desire for meaning that ultimately can only be found in purely spiritual terms.

Therefore though a valuable period of re-adaptation to life may be facilitated, once again one becomes deeply discontented with fleeting virtual phenomena thus renewing the desire for pure spiritual fulfilment.

Q So how would you describe this transitional period in terms of states and structures?

PC It represents the return of a waking state. However whereas the former waking state directly related to conscious activity, now it largely pertains to unconscious activity (indirectly projected in a phenomenal manner into experience). Thus in contrast to the “real” waking state (of conscious activity) we now have a “virtual” or “imaginary” waking state.

Likewise in terms of structures we once again have the return of linear type interpretation (geared to dualistic understanding).   

However on this occasion such understanding is directly inspired by unconscious type projections. So once again these linear structures are of an “imaginary” rather than a “real” nature.

And this transition is of considerable importance from a holistic mathematical perspective as one gradually understands that just as in mathematical terms we can have real and imaginary numbers, likewise in experiential terms we can have real (conscious) and imaginary (unconscious) phenomena - that are indirectly projected into consciousness.

Q Just a point of clarification! Do the new virtual states and structures apply in a relatively separate manner to the internal and external aspects of experience?

PC This indeed is a very relevant point! One might remember that the previous level of H1 was characterised by the attempt to properly integrate both the internal and external aspects. Though this task is not yet fully completed at this level, when H1 is traversed more or less successfully, substantial progress in this respect is made.

This means that when the next major level unfolds, internal and external aspects are now integrated to a considerable extent.

What this in effect entails is that the boundaries as between physical and psychological reality considerably recede. Rather - what was formerly viewed as - (external) physical reality is now viewed directly in psycho-physical terms; likewise (internal) psychological reality is now viewed - from the reverse direction - in physico-psychic terms.

So with the horizontal polarities now largely integrated, attention switches to the vertical (whole/part) polarities with a view to their proper reconciliation.

Q  Can you now attempt to explain the precise holistic mathematical relationships as between states and structures (as revealed through the understanding of H2)?

PC The explanation here is of a very subtle nature (though the consequent implications are enormous).

I will illustrate here with respect to the important mathematical notion of number.

In actual experience both intuitive and rational aspects of understanding necessarily interact to a degree. However the standard mathematical interpretation of number is of a merely reduced rational nature.

So from a rational perspective the number concept represents a structure that applies to all numbers (within its class).

However no clear distinction is made here as between the (discrete) rational understanding that is strictly finite, and the corresponding (continuous) intuitive appreciation that is by contrast infinite. We could alternatively express this point by saying that there is no clear distinction as between number as a (rational) structure and number as an (intuitive) state.

Therefore though the number concept potentially applies to all numbers in general (in an infinite manner) in reduced interpretation “all” numbers are then interpreted in a reduced (merely finite) manner.

So properly understood, we have an intuitive “whole” number state (that is potentially infinite) and a rational number structure concept (that applies to actual numbers).

Then in the actual recognition of specific number perceptions, again a background intuitive “part” state (enabling us to literally intuit each number in understanding) is likewise required before rational linkages with respect to individual number structures can properly take place.

This background unconscious intuitive recognition (in the ability to literally “see) is involved in all rational understanding of number (both of concepts and perceptions) and by extension all phenomenal concepts and perceptions.

Both the “whole” and “part” intuitive recognition of number as state, are of an imaginary nature. Thus if the “whole” aspect, in any context, is taken as positive (in the intuitive recognition of the general nature of the number concept), the corresponding “part” recognition is then - relatively - negative (in the corresponding intuitive recognition of the specific number perceptions).

Now when we combine both whole and part in actual real (conscious) understanding, we obtain number holons or whole/parts or alternatively onhols as part/wholes) that are then amenable to rational understanding.

When we don’t properly recognise the reduced nature of this conscious understanding, interpretation of number tends to become somewhat rigid (without due recognition of the background unconscious quality).

However the very nature of H2 understanding is that one becomes now so sensitive to such reductionism, that one cannot rest in (mere) conscious structures for long without quickly adverting to their corresponding (unconscious) states.

In other words both conscious and unconscious keep switching in a smooth dynamically refined manner between each other so that very little attachment to the conscious manifestation of phenomena remains.

Q Let me try and briefly summarise. You identify the rational (conscious) experience of structures - in precise holistic mathematical terms - as “real” and the corresponding intuitive (unconscious) experience of states as “imaginary”. Thus when we properly allow for the interaction of conscious and unconscious in experience (as structures and states respectively), all phenomenal experience is thereby rendered “complex” (with “real” and “imaginary” aspects).

The problem with the conventional scientific outlook and indeed standard mathematics is that it attempts to reduce understanding - explicitly - to what can be rationally interpreted. Thus it reduces states to structures and thereby complex to real phenomena.

Though at certain levels of investigation both science and mathematics do indeed admit the existence of complex numbers, from a philosophical perspective no clear explanation exists as to what they mean. In other words in present conventional understanding, the quantitative interpretation of complex numbers remains strongly divorced from corresponding qualitative appreciation.

PC Yes! You sum it up well. However I would add a little more in this context. Clearly, in internal psychological terms, the interaction of conscious and unconscious is recognised (corresponding to the “real” and “imaginary” aspects of experience).

However science does not seem to recognise that in (external) physical terms we also have the continual corresponding interaction of reality and unreality (as the unmanifest ground of reality). Though we cannot know the nature of unreality in any phenomenal manner, indirectly - just like the unconscious - we can become aware of its existence through the manner it projects itself (as with virtual particles) in imaginary fashion into reality.

So when seen from this perspective, both psychological and physical complement each other with the nature of both complex (i.e. containing both real and imaginary aspects).

Expressed in an alternative manner, both the psychological and physical domains comprise structures and states in continual interaction with each other.   

Q Can you briefly now clarify the nature of both Type 1 and Type 2 Complementarity?

PC We now have two classes of Type 1 Complementarity.

The first class Type 1 (a) relates to the horizontal complementarity within a given level and applies to both structures and states (considered in a relatively separate manner). In this way, internal complement external states and internal complement external structures respectively.

The second class Type 1 (b) relates to the vertical complementarity between levels that again applies to both structures and states (considered in relatively separate manner).

In this way whole complement part states and whole complement part structures respectively. So in refined spiritual terms, one is enabled in this manner to see Spirit as reflected - from one perspective - in the overall collective whole, while from the equally valid opposite perspective in each specific unique part (phenomenon) of creation.

We also have Type 2 Complementarity in the cross relationship as between structures and states (considered in an interdependent manner). This in turn reflects the refined spiritual interaction of both conscious and unconscious in experience.

The relationship here is of real to imaginary in holistic mathematical terms (and imaginary to real).

In other words when a structure is real (i.e. made conscious) the corresponding state is thereby imaginary (i.e. made unconscious).

Then in alternative manner when the state is real the corresponding structure is imaginary. In this way structure and state (and state and structure) keep switching as between conscious and unconscious in real and imaginary fashion.

So both states and structures have real (conscious) and imaginary (unconscious) manifestations with the relationship between both, real to imaginary (and alternatively imaginary to real).

Q Can you now briefly proceed through the various sub-levels of H2 (proper) with a view to detailing the relationship as between states and structures? 

PC Though in truth they considerably overlap, we can for convenience distinguish concrete, formal and vision stages.

The concrete sub-level is characterised by the growing interaction of the physical and psychological aspects of reality. So what was formerly identified as (external) physical now appears as psycho-physical; likewise what was formerly identified as (internal) psychological is now identified as physico-psychic.  This reflects in turn substantial two-way integration in experience of the horizontal polarities (external and internal).

Though a necessary conscious (real) identity is still given to phenomena, increasingly the imaginary aspect (reflecting the intuitive capacity of the purified spiritual unconscious) predominates. This leads to a more refined transparent quality with respect to phenomenal experience and increased sensitivity with respect to any imbalance relating to structures and states. Thus one learns to successfully differentiate conscious from unconscious (as a preliminary to their eventual mature integration).

So experience (intellectual and emotional) possesses an increasingly refined passive quality. Operating in a dim light it reflects the dominance of the spiritual unconscious).

In state terms, one now approaches an unconscious sleep state which is still combined however with substantial dream activity of a virtual kind.

In other words the phenomena that now arise in experience tend to emanate directly from the unconscious.

In corresponding terms we now have the predominance in experience of imaginary structures. Though these necessarily assume a temporary phenomenal existence, they really serve as holistic archetypal expressions of pure Spirit. Thus the more imaginary experience becomes, likewise the more transient are the corresponding manifestations of temporary phenomena. Thus ultimately with pure imaginary understanding (reflecting the purely refined spiritual unconscious), phenomena dissolve so rapidly that they no longer even appear to arise in experience.

Whereas at H1, remaining conflicts relate directly to rigidities with respect to the horizontal polarities (external and internal), the focus now switches to remaining rigidities with respect to the vertical polarities (whole and part) preventing their integration.

I will now attempt to explain this important point. The direction of spiritual development often initially takes an unduly transcendent direction.

Initial progress generally requires substantial spiritual discipline where the refined use of reason is used in conjunction with Spirit. However this can unwittingly lead to a degree of emotional and bodily repression (which as we have seen culminates with the “dark night” crisis).

Though resolution of this problem does lead to substantial rebalancing, where the affective unconscious is allowed to speak for itself without superego censorship, success in this regard is not obtained immediately.

Therefore there is still likely to be a stance towards development where “high-level” refined cognitive appreciation of Spirit (of an archetypal kind) is valued over “low-level” instinctual affective promptings.

And in the nature of development “high-level” spiritual and “low-level” physical experience become intimately related at this time.

Therefore any undue secondary attachment to “high-level” understanding tends to be quickly followed by compensatory “low-level” physical promptings (e.g. erotic fantasy).

Thus in the very dynamics of experience, continual switching now takes place as between the structures and states of “higher” and complementary “lower” levels (especially H2 and L2). Indeed this is the very means through which bi-directional integration of “higher” and “lower” stages takes place.

So this clearly implies that mature integration at the “higher” always requires continual revisiting of complementary “lower” stages with a view to gradual dissolution of the confused elements of experience remaining.

Furthermore it is not a fault with earlier development that this process is now necessary, for quite simply it requires a very developed spiritual light to properly unravel the unconscious confusion left over from earlier stages. And the earlier in development to which we return the more refined must the spiritual light be to successfully unravel such confusion.  

Thus the more one realises this inevitable complementarity as between the “high” cognitive and “low” affective levels of personality, the more one can allow the unconscious to speak for itself (without undue rational influence).

Ultimately the solution of this problem requires that both cognitive and affective aspects be brought into equal balance through their common reliance on Spirit.

When this is the case “high-level” spiritual consolations can be received without undue attachment; likewise “low-level” physical promptings (referred to by the old ascetic writers as “temptation”) can likewise be calmly experienced without involuntary attachment. In this manner therefore “higher” and “lower” stages in development can be successfully integrated.

Q What about the relationship as between illuminative and purgative stages at H2?

Do we have virtual dream and nightmare states and imaginary and mirror imaginary structures?

PC In a certain sense the answer is yes! However there is a subtle distinction here from the previous level where purgation and illumination stages were sharply divided in experience. Here because of the substantial integration of external and internal polarities already attained, illumination and purgation tend to become continual phases of the same stage (with no sharp distinction remaining). So in some ways the changes are much less dramatic (both with respect to illumination and purgation) though now of a more refined spiritual nature.

Q So how would you describe the states and structures remaining from L2?  

PC Well we have here simply the confused versions of what emerges at the corresponding “higher” level. Thus the confused virtual dream state complements the mature equivalent and likewise confused imaginary structures again complement their mature equivalent.

One will remember that L2 pertained to the magical stage. So we have here the infant emerging from the unconscious sleep state (that largely dominates the first level) with phenomena now less transient in experience. However as there is no clear differentiation yet of conscious and unconscious, the infant is unable to distinguish holistic desire (properly pertaining to the unconscious) from observed (conscious) phenomena. So phenomena in effect serve an imaginary purpose giving rise to the magical characteristics of the stage.

However it is worth remembering that magical belief still remains (even with the specialised development of rational consciousness). For example one’s fantasy life often serves a magical purpose in its attempts to transform real everyday experience.

So in the development of a more refined spiritual unconscious, H2 also provides the means through which magical remnants (associated with L2) are gradually dissolved. 

Q Can you now briefly continue with the formal and vision sub-levels of H2?

PC Needless to say the formal sub-level is even more devoid of real phenomenal content, which greatly facilitates a spiritually based universal world view where the physical and psychological aspects of reality are intimately related.

Indeed from a personal perspective this relates to the time when I came to properly realise how the underlying structure for this dynamic worldview was mathematical (in a holistic qualitative sense).

However the closer one approaches emptiness (in spiritual terms) the greater the conflict experienced in terms of residual instinctive elements (not yet properly assimilated). So when the direction of development is of a more purely contemplative nature, one can remain for a considerable time largely immersed in the (imaginary) unconscious with continual conflict raging as between ever more refined spiritual experience on the one hand and the surfacing of intimate physical instincts on the other.

Though the affective and cognitive aspects are initially involved in terms of the experience of both the “higher” and complementary “lower” levels, gradually the clash as between cognitive and affective is increased through affective energy being removed from the “higher” and cognitive energy from the “lower”.

In this way one is forced into the continual attempt to reconcile intellectual and emotional extremes (with the corresponding requirement of reconciling the conscious and unconscious aspects of personality). So as experience becomes increasingly dynamic, phenomena become extremely transparent and transient leaving very little mark on memory. Thus in growing increasingly sensitive as to the relationship between conscious and unconscious, one can find no rest in mere conventional (i.e. conscious) pursuits. 

 

A considerable problem therefore that can arise is that the linear middle levels may thereby be largely bypassed so that one gradually loses touch with the common everyday experiences of life.

The vision stage would then represent a further unconscious refinement with phenomenal experience now at a very low level. Here, one approaches close to a deeply spiritual sleep state (considerably empty of phenomenal form).

Q Let us talk briefly now of the implications of this twin relationship of structures and states for physics. How would you describe the physical reality corresponding to the understanding of H2?

PC The “higher” understanding of H2 provides the appropriate means of interpreting the “lower” physical level of reality at L2. (And indeed it is important to remember that this works both ways so that we get a new perspective on H2 from the purified appreciation of L2!)

So, physical reality at this level represents the dynamic interaction of both physical structures and an overall physical state (that are real and imaginary with respect to each other).

This would correspond with what in conventional terms is called string reality. However because this worldview is interpreted in terms of understanding appropriate to the middle levels, in many ways the conventional images of strings are quite inappropriate.

In truth we do not have “strings” here in any meaningful sense.

Quite clearly there is a dimensional state that cannot be divorced from the phenomena which it comprises, so that at this level we are much closer to imaginary (rather than real) interpretation. The only true conclusion is that we approach here a state of pure physical emptiness (where phenomena generated are so short-lived as to ultimately elude phenomenal detection).

The approach in present string theory to higher dimensional reality is, I believe, misguided being based on conventional notions where dimensions can be clearly separated from observable phenomena. However at the “lower” level of reality, interactions become so dynamic that dimensions have no meaning (apart from the interacting phenomena). Thus the apparent profusion of more dimensions (e.g. 10 or 11 in string theory) really points to varying confused configurations of - what we identify as - the four dimensions at the conventional levels of understanding.

Q And you would also see immense mathematical significance to this complex relationship as between states and structures?

PC Yes! I believe it is especially relevant for an appropriate understanding of the nature of prime numbers. Again the central problem here is that conventional mathematics attempts to view prime numbers in terms of the fundamental structures required to construct the natural number system.

However, numbers have a state as well as structural existence, the relationship of which is real to imaginary. Indirectly this fact is revealed in the manner in which complex numbers have become essential in attempts to unravel the secrets of the distribution of the primes.

Put another way, prime numbers have a dimensional (qualitative) as well as recognised quantitative existence. And whereas the quantitative interpretation is linear, the corresponding qualitative interpretation is - relatively - of a circular nature. We can even illustrate this distinction by looking at the reciprocal of a prime number such as 7, where the behaviour reveals marked cyclic (i.e. circular) characteristics!

Thus, if we identify prime number quantities as structures, then their corresponding qualitative dimensions behave as states (and vice versa). In this way prime number behaviour conforms somewhat to the particle and wave nature of physical light!

 Q We talked a lot about the relationship of structures and states to moral decision-making at the previous level (H1). What is the relationship involved here at H2?

PC Because one lives so much in the world of the unconscious at this time most decisions will reflect this situation. Thus, making the appropriate choice in any relevant context does not so much reflect conscious but rather an unconscious form of discernment. So decision-making is of a very passive nature where one allows as much as possible the unconscious mind to speak freely for itself and then discern though this process a correct response.

So though affective and cognitive aspects are once again involved (together with the central spiritual volitional capacity) they now operate in a more imaginary than real fashion.

Put another way one moves from moral behaviour representing local decisions in specific circumstances to the wider holistic meaning revealed by such choices. In other words one comes to see much more clearly how human motivation is guided by unconscious - rather than conscious - criteria.

Q Why cannot full integration be obtained at H2 despite the substantial reconciliation of states and structures in experience? 

PC I have pointed to one reason already, in that the very attempt to attain pure contemplative awareness can lead to substantial bypassing of the middle levels (associated with phenomena of form). So this can - for certain personalities - become a growing problem as one achieves a more specialised contemplative awareness.

However even from a contemplative perspective there can be remaining problems.

At H1 one attempts to integrate in bi-directional fashion external and internal polarities. However a personality bias may still remain with for example an introvert attempting such reconciliation largely from the standpoint of (internal) psychological adaptation and the extrovert - in reverse fashion - from the alternative standpoint of (external) physical adaptation to the world.

So a truly equal balance is unlikely to be attained at this stage.

Likewise at H2 the attempted integration of states and structures can suffer from a personality bias with respect to the cognitive and affective aspects. Thus the more rationally attuned individual may attempt to reconcile states (from the perspective of established structures) whereas by contrast the more emotionally attuned may attempt to reconcile structures (from the perspective of established states).

So at H3 diagonal integration is required entailing both horizontal and vertical integration simultaneously (which exposes these remaining imbalances from the previous levels).

Q Finally, what is the distinction here between day time and night time experience?

PC There would not be a great deal of difference. Both types would now approach deep sleep states with however virtual dreaming (expressive of unconscious wishes) taking place. However there would still be a distinction as between the spiritual sleep state (during day time) which is compatible also with the exercise of normal waking activity and the physical sleep state (at night time) which would not normally involve waking activity (though occasionally lucid dreams might occur).

Again in structural terms both day time and night time activity would be associated with imaginary activity. Once again however, though related (conscious) real activity would also occur at daytime, this would not normally be the case at night time (though lucid dreams could involve such activity).