Gaia: Integral Spirituality's book club

Hi people

http://timeto.gaia.com — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:44:12 GMT

Helllo to all of you. I'm back from the dead. I was oce "delated" then "no longer around". Now I'm back. If you want to discuss this book, let's do it .

let us be happy

Patrick

Re: Discussions about IS on other pods

Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:43:57 GMT

Hello to you from nearly a year in the future!

I just joined. I bowed out of I-I pod, my little postings were being ignored by the great and mighty ones assembled there in ~~Valhalla~~ I-I Pod so whathehey.

Here is a micro-review of Integral Spirituality, the book, not the movie:

Kw writes in a spiralling fashion, following his thoughts is like following a great river, with occasional jokes thrown in. It would help more if he showed who was on first second and third tiers of his version of the SDmap. Doesnt spend much time on 'types' does he? Boomeritis Buddhism shows his own biases. Why not Boomeritis Yoga? Overall great text, I wonder if by reading it one really does "download" the Integral Operating System.

Re: Links

Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:42:03 GMT

Here's the link to the direct page.

http://www.integralworld.net/index.html?visser16.html

Re: shadow and meditation

http://singerseeker.gaia.com — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 15:28:29 GMT

Thanks for the feedback, Patrick and Ww. I understand. We'll keep looking for something that does help then.

Have a great move, Patrick, and I look forward to hearing how it all went when you have the leisure to re-engage.

Love,

Nicole

Re: shadow and meditation

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 21:59:28 GMT

LOL

I love you, Patrick, and I don't know what to do about this. We are each asking for something different out of this, and I don't know yet how to get the two requests to agree. Right now, they are competing needs.

Blessings on the move and so happy for the lady! It's so great to get that energy back, but it's slow goin'.

I'll think on this for a bit.

~Ww

Re: shadow and meditation

Sun, 10 Jun 2007 20:58:38 GMT

Hello Nicole and WW,

Yes, I know these road rules. I find them to some extent good but really not much of road rules to me. They are to some extent so subjective, that you can twist them around so easily. They've been one of the reason I left the I-I pod.

I am a great fan of Wilber for his philospohical work, which stands for me as the most important of our times (what that means..I don't know LOL...but I think he definitely will, in time, be considered as a one of the smajor philospohers of human kind.)

But the techniques he provides , like 3-2-1 process, big mind and the like, saying those are Gold star practices...saying that Genpo roshi brings you to Satori in an hour.... well..I find that very weak.

Honestly, I think it's not his job to do that. I doubt he'll be remembered for any of that stuff.

Anyway, as for the road rules, I talked a lot about them on I-I, and I think they are neither standing out as important rules on a therapeutical setting, nor a cyber setting.I dont want to go into deatils now.

It's like everybody is bowing to those rules as to the words uttered by the leader.

There exists rules for groups which have been set for group dynamics and these seem quite good to me.

Anyway, I am preparing for moving and I have little time to write or think.

We're going to a nice place, near the lake, balconny. G-man is wonderfull, such an easy child and my wife is getting her energy back.

WW, an obvious question: you said I wrongly interpreted your words, but you didn't showed me examples. Could you illustrate that ?

LOve to you both.

Patrick

Re: shadow and meditation

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Sat, 09 Jun 2007 18:13:00 GMT

Hi Nicole.

Yeah, I have both of those on the front page of my Shadow Pod, I think. Good reading. They helped me immensely. The thing about KW's writing is that it helps me to learn how to figure the rest out myself. He gives me the stuff I need to intuit the rest. It must be some kind of "clicking" experience or something. I don't know how that works.

Anyhoo - The Road Rules have been misused by some to simply squash the kinds of communication (subjects?) that make certain people feel bad. In other worlds, people have resorted to these rules to control the situation from an external perspective instead of holding an internal inquiry. I think that was Patrick's complaint about them - he'll have to let us know, when he can, exactly what he saw. Maybe we can come up with ways to avoid those problems.

I will reread and think on them myself. I think they are helpful, but then again, they are helpful to me because I want them to be.

~Ww

Re: shadow and meditation

http://singerseeker.gaia.com — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 02:23:50 GMT

Hi Patrick and Ww

You may both have read this or similar material on shadow and shadow work, it's really basic, but, as a newbie floundering in my life, i found this chapter from wilber's nbshadow helpful. I also found these road rules from his blog helpful, and am determined to try to keep them in mind:

-“Let the next sentence out of my mouth be integral or second tier.”

However you understand integral, please write or speak from that level or altitude. You will be setting an example for others, and you will judged by others based on how well and how often you speak and act integrally. As for the criteria that are used for “judging,” at least a dozen well-known developmental models are used, and professionals who work with those models in the field will be giving us suggestions here.

The point here is that, even if you are afraid that your center of gravity is orange or green, you can still think turquoise, you can still talk turquoise, you can still light up turquoise, and the Road Rules help you respond integrally by helping you talk turquoise. The more your talk is second tier, the sooner your walk will be.

The fact that you have a really strong interest in Integral Theory already shows that you have at least turquoise cognition, virtually guaranteed. Your center of gravity might be orange or green, or it might be turquoise, but by being in a space that encourages you to think and post turquoise, it helps you—it helps all of us—rise to our own highest occasion.

If somebody consistently and belligerently responds from first tier (showing that they are not only acting first-tier but thinking first-tier), they might indeed be asked to step down from that moderated forum. We have other (unmoderated) places they can play, but not on these moderated forums, where we promise each and every one of you that we will do our best to create a turquoise common space. What else is the point of I-I????

Here’s another Road Rule:

“Any time that you are not sure whether you are being integral or not, turquoise or not, second tier or not, then feel the thinker; be aware of the thinker.”

Every time you are aware of the thinker, you make the subject object, which is the definition of development and transcendence (“the subject of one stage becomes the object of the subject of the next”). This rule—feel the thinker, feel the self-contraction—actually engages third-tier Witnessing. It reminds you and me to be aware of ever-present I AMness, the True Self, in which the entire world is arising. (See Part 2 of the Wyatt blog for an experiential exercise to awaken I AMness.)

Here’s another one:

“Are there any of my shadow elements in any of my sentences or posts?”

Notice this does not say, “Am I aware of any shadow elements in other people’s posts?” We are not allowed to shadow hunt our way through integral forums. We have to clean our own house first. There are specific forums in the critics’ circle where all sorts of criticisms are allowed and encouraged. But threaded discussions in general are not for shadow-boxing.

I have a lot of shadow work to do, and am glad to have this community on zaadz where I can learn from people like you two.

Love,

Nicole

Re: shadow and meditation

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 15:12:26 GMT

Hi, hon. Bless the G-man and the Mom and Dad!

No, that is not what was going on with me. Several times you have reinterpreted what I said incorrectly. I am very careful (usually) to say exactly what I mean. That bothers me now. So this is getting more and more complex.

What I am trying to do in the paragraph above is a Zone #4 excercize. I am trying to have a group conversation about the conversation so that we can stay clear about our altitude and Shadows. This is like #3 in the 3-2-1 process. My goal is to be able to have a #1 conversation in which we are fully awake and present with everything as well as transformed by our desire to have a better convo. But it has to begin with #3. It can't begin with #2 or #1 as I believe you have been trying to do. This means we risk drawing the "ad hominem" accusation. But that's old-skool debate rules and they can't get at this problem either, so I vote to totally drop them.

Sorry about all the numbers, it's confusing.

I would like to consciously talk about each of our interpretations of what the other is saying as well as interpret ourselves. I think it works best to begin with ourselves. Then talk about our discussion of interpretations.

I am frustrated. I honestly didn't think it would be this difficult to understand what I am asking for. I have some Shadow around that. That is prolly one reason why I'm irritated.

~Ww

Re: shadow and meditation

Tue, 05 Jun 2007 14:35:14 GMT

Hello Girls,

Thanks for your posts.

I want to explain a bit my ideas about this thing:

- The idea of bringing a third, fourth and fifth party in this, was not because I think that this situation is uncontrollable. It was more, in a spirit of finding a strategy that could be used in case of misunderstanding, a strategy that could be used in the future on other pods where conflict arise.
- My idea sprang up due to my energy at the moment: I have many duties, much work, I'm in the process of moving and changing city. This let's me little energy to deal with "thinking" and resolving virtual conflict. So I guess I wanted to find a quick way to deal with this.
- Because if we want to resolve this, we will all have to take some time. It's certainly worth it, but we all have priorities. Zaadz stays a luxury for me, a moment I enjoy, a space of game and work.

Now we can still call in someone to analyse the interaction, but I'd like to answer a few points as I have a little time and some energy.

WW, you say: " Being triggered and having anger and reaction is not a game".
- I didn't mean that the emotional reaction was a game. I agree with you, it is not. What I felt became a game, was the way to resolve it. I felt it was because of the following elements:

- WW: " Go Zone #2 on this post and it's host, Patrick." -> this post I felt was enigmatic. It's an injunction: "analyze this post and yourself ". It made me feel WW had something on her mind that she did not say, but that she wanted me to discover. Hence the word "game"

-then WW: "Lets have a mindfulness face, off right in this moment, however. Shall we? Show me how lightly you hold all this - right here. Right now. You go first.How much of this can you actually get perspective on right now?" -> again an injunction and no clue as to what did bother WW. She said she had little time and energy and did not want to go first. I can fully understand that, but she was the one who had something on her mind. Not me...at that moment.--> again, I felt WW wanted to bring me somewhere without telling me what bothered her. I felt it at as game.

-Later on , WW said: "I'm irritated about having to give an example because that means I automatically have to go first. I'm always going first in these types of convos, and for certain people, that means I'm handing over all my ammunition and they get to abuse and/or disqualify me. ". She clearly states she wants me to go first, as otherwise I may abuse her or disqualify her. OK, strong words. These makes me a potential abuser and disqualifyer. It felt weird... And still no words about what in my post she disliked.

- then WW comes out...finally LOL. She explains what she disliked and I start to understand. I found there were some direct attacks, like: "As a meditator, that might put you in the catagory of hypocrite."

I have to stop...G-man is shouting. I will continue later. Feel free to answer to this first part already.

Love to you
Patrick

Re: shadow and meditation

http://singerseeker.gaia.com — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 13:37:50 GMT

Dear Patrick and Ww,

I am as open and receptive as the two of you to a way through, whether with the help of a third party, or perhaps now we are in the space where we can work it through together.

Love,

Nicole

Re: shadow and meditation

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 04:13:54 GMT

Incidentally, methinks that your question to me the other day about whether or not you had hurt me needs to be put back in the correct direction. It is I who has hurt you, and I am sorry.

~Ww

Re: shadow and meditation

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 04:09:49 GMT

I'm sorry Patrick, but ...

"I feel, with this kind of sentences, I have to show something, or be a certain way, and as a matter of fact I appreciate beeing free of my reactions and I intend to keep this freedom.

My initial question has obviously triggered a lot of anger and I have the tendency to think you want to bring me into a game. And I don't want that."

I rest my case.

Being triggered and having anger and reaction is not a game. Not if you can witness it and pick your battles. Being trapped in it is one thing, simply being present in it is another. I'm sorry if you feel I'm trying to trap you. I am not. I am present in reaction and anger. I have no reason to repress it or deny it. I embrace it completely. I have no shame. Even from within it, I love you fully. Powerfully. Your sense of the game or trap is yours alone and a result of just how caught you still are.

Anger has a purpose. It is a signal that the We-space has been violated. If you prefer to be indiferent to anger, you will reap the whirlwind in Shadow.

What you hate, that you create.
What you hate, that you strengthen.
What you hate, that you become.

Or, it could be that we're having a language/culture gap and there is a giant misunderstanding. I'm up for a third party. Bring it on.

~Ww

Re: shadow and meditation

Mon, 04 Jun 2007 19:01:25 GMT

Thanks Nicole for your message. I appreciate your positivity.

I had in fact another idea:

WW, we could stop arguing at this point and each of the two of us (or the three, Nicole could do the same), we could chose a supervisor.

We would chose someone on Zaadz, not on this pod, wich we value and trust for its judgement or other qualities. This supervisor, if he agrees, would read the following thread, and would have, if he agrees, to write a little analysis of the interaction. Not necessarily something big, just a quick summary. Something shadow oriented maybe.

Then, if the person agrees, we could post the two or three texts of these supervisor on this thread and see if certain points come out, and this would maybe help us to clarify the matter.

The supervisors analysis would not be oriented on the discussion theme, about shadow and meditation (I trust we will soon be able to work on it again), but more on the interaction and the multiple shadows here at work.

I'm thrilled by this little game and we could play together...in case you agree.

Love to you,

Patrick

Re: shadow and meditation

Mon, 04 Jun 2007 15:28:55 GMT

Hi WW,

I really don't know what to think of your post.

Yous seem very angry when you write things like this:

-Why would I need to project my disqualification of you when I am openly and consciously disqualifying you.
-The experiences I have had were legitimate and powerful. I don't really need to run your gauntlet.

-From listening to you, as well as KW, I am inclined to conclude that Shadow isn't dealt with by meditation, but by people who may or may not meditate. Guns don't kill, people do.

Plus I feel abit uneasy by the fact that at the end of each of your mails you write things like:"So! Can you now witness this convo deeply and embrace everything that has been exchanged as not separate from you? "
"Show me."
I feel, with this kind of sentences, I have to show something, or be a certain way, and as a matter of fact I appreciate beeing free of my reactions and I intend to keep this freedom.

My initial question has obviously triggered a lot of anger and I have the tendency to think you want to bring me into a game. And I don't want that.

Now, we can:
1) go back to the initial question and try to put our minds and experiences together in order to bring some clarity to the subject.
2) make some shadow work about what just happened.
3) something else
4) something I haven't thought about
5) or something else which I thought about but I forgot, but we can wait and see if it comes back.

I'm for number one. I don't want to engage in number two, and will definitely not.

That's it for now.

Love to you,

Patrick

Re: shadow and meditation

http://singerseeker.gaia.com — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:45:08 GMT

Dear Patrick,

Sounds like you had a good weekend! I'm so glad.

Listening to you and Ww, I think we are getting somewhere with this issue of shadow and meditation, and am keen to hear what you have to say in response. I agree with Ww that people (meditating or not) can deal with shadow issues - or choose to leave them untouched for their whole lives. Whether or not we can agree on the effect of meditation itself as affecting or not the shadow - I wait to hear, my friend.

Love,

Nicole

Re: shadow and meditation

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 04:25:54 GMT

Hi, hon. Glad you're back.

Why would I need to project my disqualification of you when I am openly and consciously disqualifying you.

"...As long as meditators hold that kind of attitude with me or other non-meditators, I will feel less inclined to meditate. It shows an attachment to the duality of meditation vs. non-meditation. As a meditator, that might put you in the catagory of hypocrite. "

There is no need to project if I am not Shadowing my own impulse. However, this is clearly a disqualification:

"If you had answer “no..I don't meditate” it would disqualify your opinions on the matter of meditation and shadow, or let's say it would have left your opinions on a theoretical level (which I value) but not on a practical one(which would have added weight, as it comes from experience)."

So, even if I was projecting, you make a great Hook!

I was not talking about peak experiences alone, which are very much dependent upon the interpretation, but also some experience with intentional state changes using Big Mind and other things. Breathing doesn't work well for me, btw. I've had enough to know that I can do it and with practice and the right technique for me, will be able to do it well. That's all I need to know for now. I am intentionally not meditating or having state experiences right now. The experiences I have had were legitimate and powerful. I don't really need to run your gauntlet. I know what it does and doesn't do FROM EXPERIENCE. I just don't have years and years of patterns built up or the ability to crank up nirvikalpa on demand like a trained circus animal.

Fuck all that stupid debate bullshit.

From listening to you, as well as KW, I am inclined to conclude that Shadow isn't dealt with by meditation, but by people who may or may not meditate. Guns don't kill, people do. It seems that even 3-2-1ing, practiced by someone who either cannot or will not submit and integrate fully, doesn't necessarily deal with Shadow. The person him/herself has to want it. If you want it bad enough, everything and anything can be helpful for dealing with Shadow. If you don't want it, nothing touches it. It's as simple as that. "I can only show you the door. You're the one who has to walk thru it."

So! Can you now witness this convo deeply and embrace everything that has been exchanged as not separate from you?

"Show me."

~Ww

Re: shadow and meditation

Sun, 03 Jun 2007 21:55:11 GMT

Hi...I'm back!

It was a very profound week-end, with a lot of meditation: 6 hours daily siiting meditation and 2 hours walking meditation. There's of course a lot to say, but first, to the hot matter.

It's good WW to have said what did bother you. I must admit I supposed it was that sentence, but I felt you had to say it.

My knowledge of saturday night live is limited to a few wondefull shows I watched as I was in the states, from 89 to 1991. Belushi!!! the great Belushi! He was already dead by then, but I saw some re-runs. but then I can't see the actual shows from here in Switzerland.

Anyway, let me explain my question about the practice of meditation.

Wilber's corpus of theory touches a great range of area. I'm quite seduced by his ideas, theories and maps. But I'm trying, when possible, to see if it fits my experience. There are certain things he says, which I cannot know if they are true or not, as I do not know the practice or the books he talks about. I have a limited amount of time at my disposal and so I have to choose which practice I do, which books I read, which theory I want to get familiar with.
For example, he talks about stages and uses the buddhist language to describe them. I know a bit about buddhism, but I have not studied it thoroughly, so I will not pronounce myself on that.
On the opposite, he sometimes talk sabout Vedanta, a subject I've studied thoroughly, so I can evaluate what he says on that matter.

Were do I want to go with that?

Well, me asking if you practice meditation was simply to know if you talk from a theoretical point of view or a practical one. I have the intuition that meditation does have a profound effect on shadow, but Wilber does not say so. The best way to resolve this matter, is to meditate, and see if this practice has or not, an effect on the shadow. And this is not an easy question to answer - I'm in the process of clarifying this aspect in a theoretical way, but it's still a bit confused for the moment.

Anyway, I do not have the idea that "those who meditate are good" and the others are bad. I don't care about that. I've been meditating for 16 years now, and I must admit I had that disqualifying attitude at the beginning. But in 16 years, I've met plenty meditating assholes...to change my mind. Plus the fact that I meditate and that the "asshole nature" springs up...sometimes...or often, in me! But let's not throw the baby with the water by saying that meditation has no effect on shadow.

So my question was relevant only on the matter of discussing the effects of meditation on shadow, and not on any other quality whatsoever.

To give an example: if I want to go to a country, I can ask to someone who's been there or someone who's read about the country. I have a tendecy to value more the first, although it does not say anything about my affinities for any of the two person.

Now, WW, you say : "I've had experience with the states of consciousness that KW talks about(...)". Meditation is certainly not the only way to experience certain states. Now we could ask the question: "does peak states experiences affect the shadow?" I haven't thought about that, but I've met someone who had a NDE and who certainly was profoundly changed.

Anyway, It was not my intention to say that those who do not meditate don't know about states of consciousness.

Meditation is a process; when practiced daily It certainly affects the shadow, and this is my question.

Now, if I may, WW, I think you've projected on me some intention of disqualifying your person as whole. This was not my intention and I think I can say that honnestly. If you had answer "no..I don't meditate" it would disqualify your opinions on the matter of meditation and shadow, or let's say it would have left your opinions on a theoretical level (which I value) but not on a practical one(which would have added weight, as it comes from experience).

As for the help you ask to find a group, I don't know what to say. I'm a freelance now, and I find that meditation is a wonderfull technique, but it always comes in a package which bothers me: Buddhist, Vedanta, this or that technique.

What I suggest is to go for what they call "Vipassana". It's a meditation that uses breathing as a support. The branch of "Goenka" is fine, but is often criticized 'cause it does not teach the buddhist philosophy enough - according to other buddhist. It's emphasis is on the practice and the analysis of the mind.

Once you get the technique, you can use the groups once in a while for a short retreat and to see if you're on the right track.

Once you have the technique it is quite easy to blend it with christianity. I've found in the Philokalia, a book with the experiences of the root christians Fathers, that they were meditating on the breath.

There are many meditation techniques and I think they affect differently the shadow, but on that I will write later. The problem is that each movement thinks it got it right....You have to go past that silly attitude.

Another technique which can be used is visualization. Chose a picture of Christ or Mary or Neo and visualize it daily. This technique is very different from Vipassana, but beautifull as well. You can find some examples in the spiritual exercises from Ignacio de Loyola, a jesuite. Vipassana people say this technique is bullshit as you go in a state of concentration and then come back unchanged!!! That reminds me of our discussion!!! But still, I think they're wrong as well.

Anyway, I shall stop now!! What is happening to me!!! I become loggorheic!!!

This meditation week-end has definitely not changed my shadow! LOL!

I send much love to both of you.

Patrick

Then, after some time done on the breathing

Re: shadow and meditation

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Sun, 03 Jun 2007 04:50:16 GMT

Patrick, this is just a little note to let you know what I meant by my Saturday Night Live quote - which you may not be familiar with. Americans are so arrogant, aren't we? Always ass-u-me-ing that the rest of the world is on the same page?

"You say your answer is rooted in a lot of experience: You did not say if it was experience of meditation or shadow work... But tell me both, do you practice meditation daily? I'm just asking
'cause it is important to experience a technique in order to see what
it does on shadow."

This is begining the process of disqualification by lack of experience. As long as meditators hold that kind of attitude with me or other non-meditators, I will feel less inclined to meditate. It shows an attachment to the duality of meditation vs. non-meditation. As a meditator, that might put you in the catagory of hypocrite. As a dualist as well as a person who sees the value of meditation, I am cognitively at home with both dualism as well as non-dualism.

I've had experience with the states of consciousness that KW talks about, and I have experimented with interpreting those states in various ways. I do not meditate yet. I am currently beginning to interact with a local meditation group here in Ukiah, but that may or may not go well. If they drop some attitude on me, I'm outta there. I just want the states. I don't want the typical intolerant interpretations that most meditators have towards those who aren't of their kind. If I could find a place nearby that was free to teach me and free from intolerance, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Got any solutions for me around that? I'd be happy to hear them. Until then, don't try and disqualify me. Being who I am uniquely qualifies me to speak about what I do know, and I know what meditators look and sound like from this perspective.

~Ww

Re: shadow and meditation

http://singerseeker.gaia.com — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 14:58:05 GMT

have a great retreat patrick! we'll pick this up next week, and you will provide bring new insights and depth from this weekend.

love,

nicole