The End of Spiritual Salve
Might get around to the piece on human genetics, don't really have the energy for it right now.
Been a strange week. I've had some incredibly intense experiences. They just came and went. Kinda out left field. Not totally sure, as of yet, what to make of them.
I find myself falling into a practice of sorts, although that's not the right term for it. But we don't really seem to have another. Practice seems so planned out, strategized, enacted, separate from everyday existence, and all the rest. Or maybe that is just my male mind (mis)interpreting the world that way. Whatever the case, I find a "practice" emerging more and more in my daily life. Its been around for awhile, but only of late have I come to intuit some of the deeper workings of what is occurring.
The practice--for lack of a better term--is the dropping of all perspectives, but not in some pre-established meditation form. I'm not closing my eyes and intentionally letting everything go, in a traditional causal-state type meditation.
It is just allowing all perspectives to arise, in all worldspaces, in all ways, without either denying them their truth nor yet really believing in any of them--as final at least. I term the practice: The Realization of the Brutality of Translation.
Warning to the reader--this might get very dark. We'll see where it goes. Maybe it won't. Either way, you've been put alerted.
Every stage, every worldview, has to assume its own righteousness. Every choice is a choice against so much else, for all the lip-service I-we give to inclusion, its still basically projection. Pojecting both the greatness and evil of our own perspectives.
But what if you choose to not intentionally inhabit any one perspective or set of related perspectives? Unconsciously its inevitable, but as much as this is possible, what of this practice?
For shorthand, I talk about the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd tiers when it comes to level-structures. The first-tier, of course are the worlds of archaic, magic, mythic, rational, and pluralistic (beige to green, in Spiral-ese). The second-tier, I roughly calculate as "integral" as that movement seeks to establish itself, its own identity, boundaries, orthodoxy (and therefore heresy). It has to play the relative game.
The 3rd-tier, which is almost completely untapped, and way way off into the future in any substantial sense, as I've said before, is only being imagined by Andrew Cohen. [As with the earlier note: I'm staying away from arguments about how to assess whether they are succeeding or not.]. I'm just playing with the notion for now. Not establishing that assertion as final in any sense. More like a "What if" game. What if, in fact, this 3rd-tier connection were (even remotely) true. What does that mean?
There is a short clip with Andrew and Ken Definitely worth reading, as well as the Guru-Pandit dialogue on immortality. Ken argues that Tantricism--the general movement in Nondual Consciousness to enter into the nirvana-samsara joyfully--and not just the Mahayana image of embracing nirvana-samsara and not escaping into nirvana alone as a past precedent for what Andrew is discussing. They even talk of a New Boddhisattvic Vow: I Vow to Never Release into any Fixed Point of Consciousness, not state, nor stage, and to always continue the Evolution of Form. And Ken's point is valid. Of course taking ancient Tantric yogis/siddhis as an image is only so helpful, given that so much else in their lives was conditioned by the realities of their times, cultures, and histories.
With Andrew, he is describing this Creative Impulse and living in/as it, from the "inside." Of course if that is the case, if Andrew's injunction is arising the begginings of a 3rd-tier space, then it is just the slightest beginning. His talk, the essay on his site, and the Dialogue give it a good overview of this 3rd-tier vision. This post-evolutionary injuction and arising worldview. There is much of value, I feel, in what he has to say. He repeatedly emphasizes the development of the soul--transparency, honesty, compassion--and not simply the Realization of Spirit. For the Realization of Spirit alone--as in traditional sahaj samadhi--does not inherently bring any move to increase focused awareness, FOCUSED awareness, higher structures, higher stages.
So generically I describe that the 2nd-tier is still residing in the mental, rationalistic realms. Its the most developed of the rational stages. The 3rd-tier is the beginning of the trans-rational as a stage. Hence, the emphasis on soul-development.
And obviously then that level has to perform its own projection. Its own legitimation, boundary creations, its own proceduralisms, in-speak and all the rest. It begins to speak only from its perspective, not about IT, any longer. Deeply sincere, intelligent self-criciticism ceases.
And yet, in my practice, I realize unless one is so committed, maybe one will never do anything. That's why I call it the Brutality of Translation. Everything becomes serious, as Da would say. There is no humor anymore in the process. We humans do not yet understand how to really deeply allow for humor and still simultaneously be deadly serious when we have to, about things that matter. We can't express these deep truths with a wink-wink going on, in common without having to be so described, as the process unfolds.
And that is this practice. Even grieving the death of the 2nd and 3rd tiers--which don't even much ex-ist yet.
Its a knife's edge, for it can easily fall into absence, total nothingness. Post-nihilism. Even nihilism believes in nothing. This is too developed to be so easily configured.
I wonder if I'm breaking the Vow, if I'm not ultimately engaging, because I know that no matter what, it will be destructive, arrogant, and serious. Even when its "holy" "evolved" or whatever other words we use to describe it.
There are times though as this practice practices me when I feel that this negative move does not occur.
It feel like something more than just regular old Causal/Nondual pratice. Although what that more is, I'm still not sure. Still groping around. Maybe I'm making too much of this. Who knows.
What if you don't eventually fall back into a stuck perspective? Is it a Neo-Mahayana, a Maha-Mahayana that goes even beyond the Mahayana-Tantra two-step? A "something" that, when the perspectives flow 3rd-tier like, plays the Siddhi-Evolutionary Tantra and when perspectives flow 2nd-tier like, returns to the Mahayana perspective of embracing and trying to help all?
I'm leak my own power. I don't desire leadership. I'm too afraid to the projections and eventual disappointments that came along with being in such a position. I deeply abhor disappointing others.
Damn, I'm writing circles around this, and not really saying what I want to. I have no words, not even images yet, for this.
Letting go of all of it, without returning to a naive traditionalist spiritual point of view. Like the loveable teacher who says that the problems of the world can be overcome with just more love, more compassion, more understanding. All of which could definitely help, I'm certainly not against love, caring, and understanding, but which is its own stuck position, one that in the end is not too terribly helpful. It doesn't, to my mind, call into question enough. Call into question our assumptions, our worldviews, and the way in which we must all come to live with our conscience.
Its a deeply humbling and emotional practice. It tears open so much.
Been a strange week. I've had some incredibly intense experiences. They just came and went. Kinda out left field. Not totally sure, as of yet, what to make of them.
I find myself falling into a practice of sorts, although that's not the right term for it. But we don't really seem to have another. Practice seems so planned out, strategized, enacted, separate from everyday existence, and all the rest. Or maybe that is just my male mind (mis)interpreting the world that way. Whatever the case, I find a "practice" emerging more and more in my daily life. Its been around for awhile, but only of late have I come to intuit some of the deeper workings of what is occurring.
The practice--for lack of a better term--is the dropping of all perspectives, but not in some pre-established meditation form. I'm not closing my eyes and intentionally letting everything go, in a traditional causal-state type meditation.
It is just allowing all perspectives to arise, in all worldspaces, in all ways, without either denying them their truth nor yet really believing in any of them--as final at least. I term the practice: The Realization of the Brutality of Translation.
Warning to the reader--this might get very dark. We'll see where it goes. Maybe it won't. Either way, you've been put alerted.
Every stage, every worldview, has to assume its own righteousness. Every choice is a choice against so much else, for all the lip-service I-we give to inclusion, its still basically projection. Pojecting both the greatness and evil of our own perspectives.
But what if you choose to not intentionally inhabit any one perspective or set of related perspectives? Unconsciously its inevitable, but as much as this is possible, what of this practice?
For shorthand, I talk about the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd tiers when it comes to level-structures. The first-tier, of course are the worlds of archaic, magic, mythic, rational, and pluralistic (beige to green, in Spiral-ese). The second-tier, I roughly calculate as "integral" as that movement seeks to establish itself, its own identity, boundaries, orthodoxy (and therefore heresy). It has to play the relative game.
The 3rd-tier, which is almost completely untapped, and way way off into the future in any substantial sense, as I've said before, is only being imagined by Andrew Cohen. [As with the earlier note: I'm staying away from arguments about how to assess whether they are succeeding or not.]. I'm just playing with the notion for now. Not establishing that assertion as final in any sense. More like a "What if" game. What if, in fact, this 3rd-tier connection were (even remotely) true. What does that mean?
There is a short clip with Andrew and Ken Definitely worth reading, as well as the Guru-Pandit dialogue on immortality. Ken argues that Tantricism--the general movement in Nondual Consciousness to enter into the nirvana-samsara joyfully--and not just the Mahayana image of embracing nirvana-samsara and not escaping into nirvana alone as a past precedent for what Andrew is discussing. They even talk of a New Boddhisattvic Vow: I Vow to Never Release into any Fixed Point of Consciousness, not state, nor stage, and to always continue the Evolution of Form. And Ken's point is valid. Of course taking ancient Tantric yogis/siddhis as an image is only so helpful, given that so much else in their lives was conditioned by the realities of their times, cultures, and histories.
With Andrew, he is describing this Creative Impulse and living in/as it, from the "inside." Of course if that is the case, if Andrew's injunction is arising the begginings of a 3rd-tier space, then it is just the slightest beginning. His talk, the essay on his site, and the Dialogue give it a good overview of this 3rd-tier vision. This post-evolutionary injuction and arising worldview. There is much of value, I feel, in what he has to say. He repeatedly emphasizes the development of the soul--transparency, honesty, compassion--and not simply the Realization of Spirit. For the Realization of Spirit alone--as in traditional sahaj samadhi--does not inherently bring any move to increase focused awareness, FOCUSED awareness, higher structures, higher stages.
So generically I describe that the 2nd-tier is still residing in the mental, rationalistic realms. Its the most developed of the rational stages. The 3rd-tier is the beginning of the trans-rational as a stage. Hence, the emphasis on soul-development.
And obviously then that level has to perform its own projection. Its own legitimation, boundary creations, its own proceduralisms, in-speak and all the rest. It begins to speak only from its perspective, not about IT, any longer. Deeply sincere, intelligent self-criciticism ceases.
And yet, in my practice, I realize unless one is so committed, maybe one will never do anything. That's why I call it the Brutality of Translation. Everything becomes serious, as Da would say. There is no humor anymore in the process. We humans do not yet understand how to really deeply allow for humor and still simultaneously be deadly serious when we have to, about things that matter. We can't express these deep truths with a wink-wink going on, in common without having to be so described, as the process unfolds.
And that is this practice. Even grieving the death of the 2nd and 3rd tiers--which don't even much ex-ist yet.
Its a knife's edge, for it can easily fall into absence, total nothingness. Post-nihilism. Even nihilism believes in nothing. This is too developed to be so easily configured.
I wonder if I'm breaking the Vow, if I'm not ultimately engaging, because I know that no matter what, it will be destructive, arrogant, and serious. Even when its "holy" "evolved" or whatever other words we use to describe it.
There are times though as this practice practices me when I feel that this negative move does not occur.
It feel like something more than just regular old Causal/Nondual pratice. Although what that more is, I'm still not sure. Still groping around. Maybe I'm making too much of this. Who knows.
What if you don't eventually fall back into a stuck perspective? Is it a Neo-Mahayana, a Maha-Mahayana that goes even beyond the Mahayana-Tantra two-step? A "something" that, when the perspectives flow 3rd-tier like, plays the Siddhi-Evolutionary Tantra and when perspectives flow 2nd-tier like, returns to the Mahayana perspective of embracing and trying to help all?
I'm leak my own power. I don't desire leadership. I'm too afraid to the projections and eventual disappointments that came along with being in such a position. I deeply abhor disappointing others.
Damn, I'm writing circles around this, and not really saying what I want to. I have no words, not even images yet, for this.
Letting go of all of it, without returning to a naive traditionalist spiritual point of view. Like the loveable teacher who says that the problems of the world can be overcome with just more love, more compassion, more understanding. All of which could definitely help, I'm certainly not against love, caring, and understanding, but which is its own stuck position, one that in the end is not too terribly helpful. It doesn't, to my mind, call into question enough. Call into question our assumptions, our worldviews, and the way in which we must all come to live with our conscience.
Its a deeply humbling and emotional practice. It tears open so much.
posted by CJ Smith @ 7:15 AM
0 comments
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home