New insights

Following a hiatus of several months (due to a cycling accident) I've come back to my book again, although I won't be doing much or any work on it until I have finished a revision of my website. Basically though, my metaphysics and methodology have changed, as in both these I no longer give priority to any intellectual systems of thought that lack gnosis.

From this new perspective, my old arrangement or metaphysic was based too much on a mental interpretation of an old fashioned interpretation of the "Great Chain of Being". In the revised book I will retain the "Great Chain of Being", but only as one orientating perspective or partial understanding of Reality among many. Otehr perspectives are nonduality, supramentalisation, etc. There is still a hierarchy though, in that Supramentalisation is a far more profound and all-encompasisng Realisation than Nonduality, just as Nonduality is far more profound than Avidya/Maya/Samsara (relative consciousness).

So rather than ontological realities, the emphasis will be on the hypostases (levels of being, e.g. Manifest Absolute etc) as states of greater or lesser Enlightenment and trans-enlightenment; as different ways of experiencing the Absolute. This does not mean that i am buying into some sort of postmodernist wilber-V interpretation that says there is no such thing as metaphysics, levels of being etc, as I still fully acknowledge such realities.

In any case, I believe this approach is truer to Sri Aurobindo and the Mother's position, which remains my central orientating perspective

Two different Integral initiatives

Two very different "Integral" projects:

The Gnostic Centre - a research centre for the growth of consciousness, based on Aurobindonian Integral philosophy. "Gnostic" here would seem to be a reference to Sri Aurobindo'sd term for higher consciousness and supramentalised being (see The Life Divine Book II ch.27)

To quote from the site:

based in new delhi, set up as a non-profit public charitable trust, in 1996, engaged in research, training and education

The Gnostic Centre was set up by a group of youth, with the purpose of creating a space for those who seek a more integral knowledge - about themselves as well as the world. Based on the Integral Yoga philosophy of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, it is working towards creating a community for research and training in growth of consciousness, and to grow into a future university that integrates the subjective and objective realms of knowledge - towards a larger perfection of knowledge and action, based on an inner core of self-discovery and self-mastery.

and also

The Gnostic Centre is continuously engaged in creating resources that emerge out of its ongoing work, as well as support that work based on study and action research in the fields of Integral Yoga, Psychology, Self-development, Integral Education, Management, Social Change, Transformative Learning, Culture......

Includes an "International Centre for Integral Studies" (ICIS) which is quite different to both the Californian Institute of Integral Studies and the Wilberian Integral Institute, although the similarity of topic titles to Wilberian I-I i\s intriguing. Obviously, the content will be very different (and no doubt much more practical and grounded in authentic spirituality). But I am extremely pleased to see this development, which shows that the Wilberians do not have a monopologly on "integralism". Indeed, my main criticism of Wilber is not his philosophy (as I consider his attempt at a grand synthesis very inspiring) but his hegemonistic claim to ownership of "Integral" (see the AQAL glossary) and to represent and build upon Sri Aurobindo, who he seriously misinterpretates. If he even half-correctly interpreted Sri Aurobindo I would be all for him! Yet, ironically, even he is still furthering the Divine Work established by Sri Aurobindo and the Mother

The Gnostic Centre / International Centre for Integral Studies seems to have been around for over a decade (founded in 1996, the journal goes back to 1997), which intriguingly is also about the time the Wilber Integral Institute was established (1997-98).

A very different, and still new, and equally worthy, project is Open Source Integral, a forum established by Mike of the Integral Research Group (Integral Praxis blog). It's a bit like a post-wilberian version of Zaadz, although much smaller (only two dozen or so members). But some very interesting discussions and comments, even if only a very few people are involved.

For example, might Integralism at the broadest be defined, in one contributer Bill's words (this in a comment on the thread "Mapping out the "Integral" Tool Kit"), as a "cohesive model of human development" (this would nicely include both Wilberism and Sri Aurobindo's Integral Yoga)

But I'm not sure if the Integral Open Spource Project will keep going; the problem being that a certain minimum critical mass of people is required (the "tipping point" or threshhold) for the project to have a life of its own, rather than being "carried" by only one or two people.

For example, Zaadz has a life of its own. The science fiction project I initiated and co-founded, Orion's Arm, also has a life of its own. Even though i am involved at only a very minimal level now it is still continuing better than ever. Wikipedia has a life of its own; I can definitely see it continuing even withoutt Jimmy Wales at its head.

I don't think that Wilber's Integral Institute has, because i cannot see it continuing without Wilber's central presence, except as a hollow shell or at best an exoteric religion. But a wider Integral Movement definitely has a life of its own, because this movement seems to already be being established, and is no way depedent on the personality cult of one person. Whether it will continue to grow and develop and become a whole new evolutionary cultural stage of consciousness, as Sri Aurobindo (using different terminology - see The Human Cycle) Paul Ray, Sally Goerner, Ken Wilber, Don Beck, Scott McIntosh, and others have suggested, remains to be seen. For now, my position is that the Western Integral Movement (established by but no longer limited to Wilber) is the newest development of the New Paradigm, and the New Paradigm/Integral movement is the secular and intellectual counterpart of the New Age.

An interesting development, were it to happen, would be a New Paradigm convergence of Integral Movement (secular, exoteric) and Integral Yoga (esoteric). If Wilber keeps publicising Sri Aurobindo, maybe something like this might actually happen, despite Wilber (and most of the mainstream Integral movement)'s complete misunderstanding of what Sri Aurobindo and the Mother actually taught. That is why I say that even Wilber is, unknowingly, furthering the Divine Work established by Sri Aurobindo and the Mother.

Integral Movement page on Wikipedia

I have to admit, the Integral Movement page on Wikipedia seems to be shaping up quite well. I was quite concerned about the resistance of Wikipedia to even progressive ideas like Integralism (even though it is exoteric), and saw this resistance as an example of the old consciousness against the new. Well, it is, but the new consciousness can still establish itself in the current status quo; indeed it is absolutely essential that it does so, if change and transformation is to occur.

So I've been merging material from redirect pages, and with footnotes it is looking more scholarly. So even though these conservatives annoy me, i have to admit that I do agree with them that in terms of current popular knowledge (and that is what Wikipedia represents, the status of popular Western secular knowledge as it is at present, all from a geekish perspective) one can't justify a whole string of Integral articles. But a single one, well written, on the Integral Movement, is a good idea.

So if anyone reading this wants to chip in and add to the page, please do so! Especially important are footnotes and citations, so it is best to add stuff that can be referred to in print or in scholarly online articles.

Evolutionary allies

My new essay - "Evolutionary allies - an Integral approach" - has just the other day been posted on Frank's Integral World website, and also given a mention on Integral Praxis. This essay (the title inspired by the AUM 2007 conference) represents a major policy shift for me, as I have already mentioned on Zaadz. My previous work in the Integral Movement as critic and, so to speak, Wilber rival, has, I would like to think, been helpful in furthering a number of goals, among which are: (a) explaining that it was Sri Aurobindo hismelf who first coined and defined "Integral" in a spiritual evolutionary context (b) reclaiming Sri Aurobindo's actual teachings from mainstream Integralist misinterpretations; (c) illustrating the limitations of Wilber's purely mental-intellectual approach (lacking esotericism and gnosis) in explaining the "big questions"; (d) showing how the Integral Movement is much larger than just Wilberian ideas or the Integral Institute alone; and (e) contributing to broader definitions of Integralism. Now, having done all that, and also defined my own position, and hopefully not made too much of a fool of myself in doing so :-) I feel much more enthusiastic about emphasising similarities and working together in cooperation, in bringing about the new world; through dialogue and unity in diversity (and diversity in unity). Especially since I find myself identifying equally strongly with both the Integral Yoga community and the Larger Integral Movement.

Some people may wonder why I bothered to critique Wilber in the first place, since he is not an esoteric thinker. The answer is that as a popular new consciousness writer he plays an influential role in the current paradigm shift and process of global transformation, even if it is "only" on an exoteric level. Because exoteric and esoteric are equally necessary. And the future and currently emerging society or cicvilisation will honour both (as well as the "trans-esoteric" position of the Supramental transformation)

My interest now is in writing my books, in cooperation and friendly dialogue with others who share the same aim of making this a better world, respecting and honouring differences as well as commonalities, and presenting a new worldview inspired both by Sri Aurobindo and the Mother's teachings and by esotericism and science in general.

By "esotericism and science" I mean that all esoteric and spiritual knowledge should conform to the empirical discoveries of science on the material level. So on the one hand, no facile New Age pop Quantum physics (you know, what the Bleep, all that stuff). And on the other, no freaking out about evolutionary science. It is no good rejecting Darwinian science because it offends one's religious or philosophical sensibilities! A true esoteric evolutionary integral worldview has to include all these things, both authentic science and authentic esotericism. And evolution, even material evolution, is a mighty spiritual truth, for those who have eyes to see it as such.

Responses to my essay

I've been getting very positive feedback in response to my essay. I've also been interested in criticism (which I always value highly), and Joe Perez has written a passionate rebuttal, to which I wrote a counter-reply. It's all on Frank Visser's Integral World site now for anyone who wants to follow the whole thing

• "Redefining Integral" - my original essay


• "Questioning Kazlev's Redefinitions" - Joe Perez' reply (also posted or mentioned on several other forums)


• "Wilber and Aurobindo" - my counter-reply

Although Joe and I may differ intellectually (I mean it is really only on the matter of KW, he likes Wilber and AQAL while I take a contrary position) I think highly of him, and feel that at bottom Integralism is still about a common goal (more on this in a follow up post). He sent me a short friendly email concerning my reply to his critique. But not suire if the debate is going any further for now. So if anyone else wants to jump in on either side of the debate, or alternatively propose their own pov, that would help carry things along

Essay published, and Kosmos

Phew, finally finished a few days ago my latest essay, Redefining Integral, which has just appeared on Frank Visser's Integral World website (based on my earlier blog post to Integral Praxis of basically the same name, but with heaps more stuff). It should be a seminal essay in the field, and I feel it is my best essay on the Integral Movement so far

Unfortunately, in the version I sent Frank for Integral World, there was an error that came about through my originally too glib overview of the integral journal Kosmos and not taking the time to review their website in more detail.

Because Don Beck's spiral dynamics diagram features prominently, and because there are one or two essays there which are inspired by a more traditional integral theory (the journal itself was founded in 2000, before the larger integral movement really took off), in my essay I classified Kosmos as Integral strictu senso (Wilber-Beck-inspired Integral, with stages, quadrants, etc). I was then informed (after the essay had appeared on the Integral World site) that Kosmos is also closely associated with many individuals from the wider Integral movement; for example Ervin Laszlo (Club of Budapest) and Ashok Gangadean (World Wisdom Council). There is also material by Brian Swimme ("Great Story", “Global Mindshift”), Elizabeth Sahtouris (also on the World Wisdom Council), and in the coming issue Jorge Ferrer (California Institute of Integral Studies). All this authors seem to be dismissed as “postmodern” / “green” by the Integral Movement stricto sensu (Wilber, while being very gracious about it, still considers Ferrer's approach to be “green” meme, while Swimme is listed as a Conscious Evolutionist rather than an Integralist in the WIE issue no. 35 on different interpretations and schools of Evolutionism) All in all, Kosmos falls within the category of the Larger Integral Movement, and indeed seems to be one of the forerunners in the field, with an admirable emphasis on global activism, through their association with the United Nations.

There is more that could be said, but I'll save it for my book in progress A New Heaven and a New Earth

Fortunately, my article has since been corrected (I wrote to Frank about it, and he updated the page straight away, thanks Frank!). But all this raises the problem of how one can accurately convey and present a global movement and paradigm shift. Up until now, I have tended to work on my own, my only connection with the wider integral community being with certain forums and individuals (because there isn't time to contact everyone, but also I admit I was being lazy), it is easy for errors and superficial perceptions to sneak in. In that way at least I feel for Wilber, he's one guy but he's trying single-handedly to explain the world; it can't be done.

So this has shown me that the time has come for me to get more involved in the larger integral / mind shift community, not just on Zaadz, Open Integral, Integral World, and Integral Praxis, admirable as those forums may be, but other groups, forums, organisations, and journals as well.

An Integral rant

Author's note: This was originally written as a rather rambling rant. I decided to put it more in order, and divide it into four statements. These are

• The Current Integral Movement does not seem to be receptive to the concept of Divinisation


• The Integral Movement is a subset of the New Age/New Paradigm/Global Mindshift and lacks gnosis


• The Synthesis of Yoga describes true Integral Spiritual Practice in contrast to the non-integral spirituality of the mainstream Integral movement


• There is a lack of understanding of Bhakti (Surrender to the Supreme) in the Mainstream Integral Movement

This material is also being incorporated into an essay that I will submit to Frank Visser's Integral World when finished.

The Current Integral Movement does not seem to be receptive to the concept of Divinisation

I've been having some interesting discussion on the Integral blogs. And one thing that intrigues me is the lack of receptivity to concepts such as Divinisation. Now, I will say that Integral Praxis is a very admirable initiative, the people behind the blog are top guys, and hopefully something raelly meanintgful and productive will come of it all. I support them, and I'll probably chip in with comments and posts now and then, and also give them links and mentions. But having said that, I am reminded of where I stand, and where the Integral Movement (as opposed to the Integral Yoga movement, which which I identify) stands. And the difference is great. And always has been. I still see the Integral Movement - whether wilberian, neowilberian (hows that for a neologism ;-), postwilberian, or nonwilberian, as an important part of the planetary mindshift. And I still identify with it to a partial extent, in teh sense that I agree with their ideals of spiritual evolution, the integration of knowledge, and building a better world (all of which are indistinguishable from the goals of the mainstream New Age movement too). And I find the Kosmos definition of Integral preferable to the Integral Institute definition, because there is more praxis and less theory there.

The Integral Movement is a subset of the New Age/New Paradigm/Global Mindshift and lacks gnosis

Some background, for those who don't know my story. The reason I became interested in the Integral Movement because it seemed to me to embody a spirit of universal spiritual synthesis combined with the intellectual rigour lacking in the New Age. The reason I became disillsuioned with the Integral Movement is when I realised the whole movement is limited to a very Wilber perspective, which goes against the whole idea of a synthesis of teachings, in which everyone has their say. Who wants to follow a guy who isn't even enlightened? This is why (I discovered to my great disappointment) there is no authentic gnosis or integral spirituality there at all.

The problem with the Integral Movement is that its foundation is not spirituality or enlightened revelation, but both a religion based on Wilber worship, and an intellectualism based on Wilber books, and some Westernised Buddhism thrown in (Buddhism is pretty much the only spirituality they can handle, because it is intellectual and pragmatic, and does not involve metaphysics or radical practices such as Surrender to the Supreme; you can be a physicalist and still be a practicing Buddhist! It is ideally set up for the secular Western mindset), as well as some Californian Lifestyle choices marketed as "Spiritual Cross-Training". And even the people disillusioned with Wilber, not interested in his personality cult, and involved in activism and practice, are still limited by his intellectualism; there is no gnosis there at all.

This is now being supplemented by practical activism, which is a very positive development. But the activism and practice is still tried to modernist, wilberian, and buddhistic perspectives.

On the theoretical level, the Integral Movement can synthesise opposites and integrate the diverse areas of human knowledge in a larger evolutionary paradigm. But so could Whitehead, Vernadsky, Teilhard, Haskell, Jantsch .... So what is unique?

On the practical level it is no different to the general New Age / New Paradigm / Alternative / Global Mindshift / etc movements. All of which are highly worthy, and the most exoteric stage of the Integral Transformation. But it is not an Integral Movement or Practice, but a New Age sensu lato (Hanegraaf) / New Paradigm / Alternative / Integral / Global Mindshift / Great Turning cluster of mcurrenst within the larger Integral Transformation.

The third level? that's the spiritual. And I mean teh authentic, total transformation of all parts of the being and incorporation of all the yogas. And you won't find this sort of spirituality anywhere in the current, mainstream, Integral Movement (which is not to deny the spiritual nature of the movement, but I am talking about a much more radical and yogic spiritual practice)

The Synthesis of Yoga describes true Integral Spiritual Practice in contrast to the non-integral spirituality of the mainstream Integral movement

The following passage, from chapter V of the introduction of Synthesis of Yoga, explains how even in its most preliminary methodology, the Integral spirituality of Sri Aurobindo goes far beyond anything in the Integral movement now, and probably beyond anything the Integral Movement will have to offer for decades to come (unless my own work has an influence; because by writing about something i am also changing it).

...it is always through something in the lower that we must rise into the higher existence, and the schools of Yoga each select their own point of departure or their own gate of escape. They specialise certain activities of the lower prakriti and turn them towards the Divine. But the normal action of Nature in us is an integral movement in which the full complexity of all our elements is affected by and affects all our environments. The whole of life is the Yoga of Nature. The Yoga that we seek must also be an integral action of Nature, and the whole difference between the Yogin and the natural man will be this, that the Yogin seeks to substitute in himself for the integral action of the lower Nature working in and by ego and division the integral action of the higher Nature working in and by God and unity. If indeed our aim be only an escape from the world to God, synthesis is unnecessary and a waste of time; for then our sole practical aim must be to find out one path out of the thousand that lead to God, one shortest possible of short cuts, and not to linger exploring different paths that end in the same goal. But if our aim be a transformation of our integral being into the terms of God-existence, it is then that a synthesis becomes necessary.

Ok, let's look at Sri Aurobindo is saying here.

Ordinary existence or nature itself is an integral movment, but one based in ignorance ("ego and division").

The various previous yogas were not interested in transforming this world, only in finding the quickest shortcut out, selcting only a single attribute of the lower nature (prakriti) and using taht to attain the transcendent (so it could be jnana or bhakti or whatever). Hence Buddha's parable of the arrow. Why waste time discussing metaphysics when you can be working on attaining Liberation?

Sri Aurobindo's unique synthesis - Integral Yoga, in contrast has to combine all the systems. This is because he isn't interested in fleeing the world. rather he wants to transform it. But to transform it he has to addre4ss all the aspects of the lower nature, and hence incorporate all the yogic techniques. rather than just one, he has to synthesise all of them.

And that's Integral Yoga.

Now, let's return to the present-day Integral Movement.

This proposes an evolutionary synthesis of knowledge. This is the first stage, theory. Here we have Wilber and development psychologists like Kegan and Cook-Gruber, Spiral Dynamics (Don Beck), neowilberian theory (i.e. people who like Wilber but add extra stuff to his ideas - e.g. Mark Edwards), and postwilberians (people who reject or go beyond Wilber but still retain certain of his ideas - e.g. Edward Berge of Open Integral). And we have lots of others who use "integral" in a non-wilberian sense - e.g. Sally Goerner and Erwin Lazlo. There is also a lot more that isn't called Integral but that says the same thing - e.g. non-integral spiral dynamics (Chris Cowan), Great Story neo-teilhardism (Thomas Berry, Brian Swimme), and New Age sensu lato and so on. So we can't even use the word Integral because Integral is just a subset of a broader paradigm shift.

Then we have the next stage, practice. This means putting that exoteric synethsis into practice in thought and word and deed. This is the cutting edge, the "frothy edge" to use their term, of the Integral Movement now. And once again there is also Great Story eco-spirituality and practice, the Alternative Movement, the New Age sensu lato, etc etc . Once again, Wilberian/Neowilberian/Postwilberian Integral is just a tiny subset of a much bigger paradigm shift.

Then we have stage three, Integral Yoga. This means going beyond mental forms altogether, and going beyond exoteric limitations, and living and practicing a life and praxis and activism that is infused with gnosis and enlighetnemnt and spiritual transformation of self and world at every stage. Here is where we leave the poor Wilberian movement far behind. Because this stage involves all spiritualities, not just Wilber's Westernised Buddhism.

So it can be seen that spirituality in the current Integral Movement is old, premodern to use their term. They have integral theory, excellent. They are only now making admirable steps in practice. have not made a single advance beyond what the Buddha discovered 2500 years ago, and if anything they have gone backwards, because rather than following the path to enlightenment they get distracted by all this mental masturbation over minutiae of quadrants and lines and waves and altitude and methodological perspectives.

There is a lack of understanding of Bhakti (Surrender to the Supreme) in the Mainstream Integral Movement

What Sri Aurobindo taught, in contrast to all this, was an Integral Spirituality. He wasn't the first, Ramakrishna did it before him. But so far this Integral Spiritual Practice is limited to the Aurobindonian Integral Yoga community, which with a few admirable exceptions such as AUM ("All USA Meeting") and an offshoot blog SCIY ("Science, Culture & Integral Yoga"), does not dialogue with the rest of the world. Well, who can blame them? There's a lot of ignorance out there, and it can be tedious. But this means the collective social transformation (noosphere) is not addressed.

Each is one-sided to some extent. The Integral Yoga community in the West is not active in outreach (in India however Sri Aurobindo is very big, and there are important education iniatives in the state of Orissa for example). While the Integral Movement remains tied to a limited, non-integral, non-world-transforming spirituality.

Ok, but what about Michael Murphy - Integral Transformative Practice - linking Aurobindo and Wilber? Well, I cannot comment here. i get a good vibe from his photo, but does ITP raelly radically go beyond the mental, transcend the ego, transmute the lower desires, enlighten the cells of the body, bring the Divine down to Earth? Or is it just another California lifestyle thing? I can't tell, because I have no experience with it. but what makes me cynical is that Murphy, like Craig Hamilton (formerly of What is Enlightenment? magazine, and a devotee of Andrew Cohen), while strongly supportive of the AUM 2007 Conference, seem to lack insights in the way that Bhakti and Surrender focused on an enlightened guru (not an intermediate zone one) works. To quote from a report about the AUM. Below is an article written for Auroville Today on the conference

Craig Hamilton (former editor of "What is Enlightenment?" magazine, whose workshop at last year's AUM brought this question into the open) along with Michael Murphy of Esalen found that their major criticisms (the unquestioning acceptance of Mother and failure of self-reflection that they'd seen in the Ashram and Auroville) were effectively answered by the very fact of the panel itself.

Failure of Self Reflection? Or heart-felt devotion through Bhakti Yoga? A devotion taht transcends the mental faculties. This is not to say that the mental cannot be employed as well; indeed it should be to avoid the slide into fundamentalism. But one thing I find interesting is that nowhere is there any evidence of Bhakti, or of Surrender to the Supreme, in the entire Integral Movement. This is not surprising, given the over intellectual nature of the whole movement. People with a strong mental nature tend to be weakly developed on the emotional. But unless there is balance between head and heart, then nothing can be achieved.

by the way I do feel this balance at forums like Integral Praxis and Zaadz; but I never see it in Wilber's obsessive intellectualising. This is obviously one reason why Wilber frequently mentions Sri Aurobindo, but never once in all his thousands of pages The Mother.

But balance of head and heart alone are not enough. A third element is needed; transcendence of the rational mind. This requires giving up hierarchical perspectives such as ideas of second tier elitism etc. And this is achieved most powerfully through heart-felt aspiration to the Supreme. If your mind and heart is centered on the Supreme, then you won't be thinking about how special and superior your mental understanding is, how you are at the cutting edge or frothy edge of kosmic evolution, and so on.

This essential humility is what is most needed for the Integral Movement

So where do I go from here? Well, I'll keep blogging and stirring things up. And finish my books. And help launch a new definition of Integral, which is also teh original definition, which is so far in advance of what is around now (which is not to denegrate, only to speak strongly).

The world is waiting for a new evolutionary consciousness.