We are living the surpassing of all previous ages. This has been made obvious in so many venues it is no longer necessary to refer to them. What is necessary is to look at the new emerging disciplines and sciences. It is no longer a curiosity energy medicine and psychology and other healing modalities are rapidly moving to the forefront of a holistic paradigm. This most overused and over-rated word leads to many reactions, not all of them supportive.

Interestingly, it is still philosophy and science which help us to understand what constitutes the new science. We say "new," acknowledging over a century of foundational works in philosophy, physics, biology, chemistry, sociology, psychology and even the law. The criteria for knowledge in material sciences remains the same: material evidence that is valid and reliable. In the new paradigm there is a shift away from reflective, and traceable, proof, but a rigor regarding "self-evidence" that is required for the new paradigm. In a sense all evidence is "self-evidence." This is certainly true of mathematics, logic and the hard sciences. But the soft sciences, and here we mean many of the new modalties that have not subjected themselves to the rigors of material science, and who rely on an experiential and subjective validation, remain in a cloud. Matrix Energetics and Body Talk, both popular and seemingly effective modalities have not subjected their work for peer review, show no evidence of correlative studies or double blind studies. This is because they rely on "subjective" reports of clients to suggest they have experienced a shift in disease, disorder or dysfunction. R. Bartlett, head of Matrix Energetics, has done some energy photography in an attempt to show a shift in the energy fields around a client, but Body Talk has, to my knowledge, not attempted a scientific study. The world is a big place and there may be a few out there, but I haven't heard of any.

I think the problem is two fold: in the shift from an ego based perspectival science, everything has to be validated via material and mathematical proofs. In the new paradigm all one has to do is report a subjective shift and it is accepted as proof of the modality working. Yet no measure of any change of any condition, real or imagined, is done. Follow up in Body Talk would require extensive tests of body fluids, blood, organs, bones and the like to find a change with lasting effects. This requires pre-testing and post-testing at regulated intervals to measure the effect. This seems obvious, I am sure, but it is important to remember that interior experiences are a new horizon in science. The criteria for change or transformation may not be the same as in the hard sciences because the criteria for knowledge is not merely material, mathematical or ego-based. The new paradigm requires a collective subjective
experience which validates the interior experience. This requires an understanding of awareness, focus and intention, things that add new variables to the science of healing.

Some studies exist attempting to measure the influence of subjective states on outcomes, but it seems there needs to be a correlations to lasting effects and material changes in diseases, disorders and dysfunctions. This is what I call the "miracle effect" because so many claim to have experienced change, but the condition being treated wasn't life threatening. Acute and chronic conditions need to studied and validated. To date Reiki, Qi-Jong and Emotional Freedom Techniques have been tested with many positive outcomes with subjective experiences being merely one aspect of the study. Since we are now at a place where power of consciousness and intention can have a lasting effect on a physical condition needs to have more widespread. Perhaps it is time to declare a new field: The Science of Intention.

Once We Played

Once we played along the shores of the Danube,
by Ganseheufel it was, Peter, Amana, Maria and
John.

We chose "Blind Man's Bluff" to while the hours,
soon our laughter and giggling replaced time itself.

It mattered little who was blindfolded, let alone
who was stepping into invisibility to hide the play.

But we always seek out the play, even when we
don't know we are hiding right out in the open.

Sweet spring sun fell on us and we couldn't stop,
"once more!" we said and fell into the mystery.

Who attended us then attends us even now,
the devas of the trees, the wizards of the river.

How long have they seen us come and go,
perhaps only an hour to their reveried duty?

Soft laughing rising up through the stately oaks,
innocent as children we became forgetting all.

No grades, no schedules, no relationships at all,
just the side stepping of realities proven false.

The blindfold forcing us to an inside forgotten,
a searing flash of intuition only to miss again!

And as we spun around only to hear the tease,
the giggle of those so close as a small breath.

Goosebumps rise on child arms, spinning round,
reaching out not knowing, but understanding it all.

Playing until the first fall of dusk came upon us,
making us all equal in the blindfold of time itself.

Sitting exhausted on the grassy field, breathless,
happy, and waiting for the first glimmer of the stars.

Thus it is we end, surrounded, protected, filled
with each others blindfolds till we finally see.

No words suffice and no interpretation survives,
I remember, thus I never forget, and then I see you.

©John Kadela

A Round of Cards

Suppose it then a battlefield like all battlefields,
where the sudden meets the many in mystery.

Shall it matter what year it was or the very place,
or that thousands engaged in a thousand wars?

But this has always been so, hasn’t it, just now,
how one learns how surgically simplified it all i

Perhaps a smell of fresh mown grass rising up,
May morning cannonade shaking daffodils.

How so ever it is within you it does shape us,
swimming down here at the bowl’s bottom.

Honor comes in all kinds of flavors and shades,
duty displayed with enigmas and emblems.

One would think that sewing perfected itself,
given all the insignia, battle flags and stripes.

Young men eager depart home as always,
some come back duty secured, some not.

“War is bullshit,” the old German told him,
“in Stalingrad we ate handfuls of dirt to survive.”

We name battlefields with whispers and pride,
as if we ourselves took a sniper round into ourself.

A young boy trembled with fear and memory,
standing in circled painting of death’s glory.

His memory, you see, came back in a flash,
knowing the day and the time he harshly died.

But war will do that, make boys into men,
sometimes into liars, cheats, and, yes, soldiers.

A sultan, a mystic and a Christian knight met,
once long ago in the dark of a starry desert night.

Just off and to the left, you might say today,
where knightly duties were being invented.

How these three came to be in such an inn,
such a night and the fast flowing cards winning!

The sultan’s father sent him, you see, for Shams,
and Veled always did as his father directed him.

He knew this was the whole of the point of living,
while Shams catches the young knight skimming.

This knight knew how, and what debauchery is,
shamelessly caught under a master’s loving gaze.


In a flash perhaps it all came to him, why he is,
all the sins on his head, and that he is a cheat.

What measure profoundly played here is this,
who is Shams and why does he do him this way?

Humility will come now or later, it’s our choice,
we always know the exact date and place of it.

Who we lied to, who we stole from, seeds spilled,
in the end, he realized, it was only from himself.

Shattered and awakened at once, he wept,
perhaps, but he offered to give it all back at once.

Shams, holding all the hearts, no doubt at all,
says, “keep it and take it to our friends in the West."

Abundance like this the boy had never seen,
the beggar acted as if he were surely a king.

And this over a wooden table in dim light,
in a far away place in the midst of battles.

Nothing has changed, or so it seems today
yet do we always know who is amongst us?

Is there an enemy out there to be killed,
or is it the deadly sins within us dying to die?

Whichever the fields of drama are always there,
guided it seems by men and women wiser than we.

And so they always find us, usually asleep,
maybe dreaming of girls with forgiving hearts.

Or of the recognition we work on ourselves,
only to realize we are panhandlers of spirit.

Could it be the game itself is transpired there,
with each hand something more is revealed?

Such as knight as this taken up by his enemy,
being loved and transformed in a single glance!

That we would we give this to our enemies,
that we would even given it to ourselves.

And so it was on a night long ago in Damascus,
when Francis of Assisi came in to a round of cards..


©John Kadela

Conscious Force and The New Spirituality

©John Kadela, Ph.D.

Jean Gebser (1986) presaged the quest of an entire generation when he wrote The Ever-Present Origin. With its publication in 1948 Gebser, in a single master stroke, upended the western tradition with his now famous phenomenology of cultures and consciousness. His depiction of the essential structures of human consciousness evolution would go on to have profound and lasting impact in both the sciences and the humanities, but this is only because his multi-dimensional unfolding of the spectrum of consciousness already respected the individual and collective breakthroughs in the arts, literature, science, law, medicine, psychology and sociology. Just as Gadamer (1989), Merleau-Ponty (2002) and Heidegger (1962) traced out the possibility for a new understanding of consciousness and being, Gebser raises the question of the concretion of the spiritual as the fundamental consideration of the coming decades. “Instead, we can do something that each of us does or should do with regard to his own life, except that we shall focus our inquiry upon something supra-personal, something encompassing the lives of several generations, rather than upon the personal existence of one individual. Just as now and again in the course of his own life one might ask: Who am I really? Just as one might say in retrospect: I was thus and so I became who I am today; and just as in so doing one realizes, on the one hand that there are constants which to a certain extent compose his/inner structure and, on the other, that certain events took place which were able to change the consequences of this structure.” (Gebser, p. 4)
This is no mere question seeking a psychological resolution of personal individuation, it is the awakening of a new consciousness whose essential action is the concretion of the spiritual. To an older generation, Gebser (1985) says, this may appear as a kind of historical destiny, but Gebser makes clear that the characteristics of the new consciousness, one that has been unfolding for nearly two hundred years, is not a destiny at all, but supercession of all previous consciousness structures. In order to make clear what we are referring the following tables will give the reader a comparative map of what Gebser has accomplished. Tracing out the essential structures, Gebser identifies 5 types of consciousness structure based on their typical features. These include the archaic, magical, mythical, mental-rational and integral structures. Phenomenologically speaking, one of the key ways of understanding these structures is through their space-time characteristics. The fundamental characteristics follow then on the basis of the areas of emphasis related to human evolution. Frequently Gebser (1985) refers to the impact such a transformation of consciousness will have on the mental-rational structure as it collapses.
Structure
1. Space and Time Relationship
a) Dimensioning
b) Perspectivity
c) Emphasis
Archaic
Zero-dimensional
None
Prespatial / Pretemporal
Magic
One-dimensional
Pre-perspectival
Spaceless / Timeless
Mythical
Two-dimensional
Unperspectival
Spaceless / Natural temporicity
Mental
Three-dimensional
Perspectival
Spatial / Abstractly temporal
Integral
Four-dimensional
Aperspectival
Space-free / Time-free

Structure
1. Space and Time Relationship
a) Dimensioning
b) Perspectivity
c) Emphasis
Archaic
Zero-dimensional
None
Prespatial / Pretemporal
Magic
One-dimensional
Pre-perspectival
Spaceless / Timeless
Mythical
Two-dimensional
Unperspectival
Spaceless / Natural temporicity
Mental
Three-dimensional
Perspectival
Spatial / Abstractly temporal
Integral
Four-dimensional
Aperspectival
Space-free / Time-free


Structure
2. Sign
3. Essence
4. Properties
Archaic
None
Identity (Integrality)
Integral
Magic
Point
Unity (Oneness)
Non-directional unitary interwovenness or fusion
Mythical
Circle
Polarity (Ambivalence)
Circular and polar complementarity
Mental
Triangle
Duality (Opposition)
Directed dual oppositionality
Integral
Sphere
Diaphaneity (Transparency)
Presentiating, diaphanous “rendering whole”

Structure
5. Potentiality
6. Emphasis
a) Objective (external) (Aspect of the World)
b) Subjective (internal) (Energy of Initiator)
Archaic
integrality
unconscious spirit
none or latency
Magic
unity by unification and hearing / hearkening
nature
emotion
Mythical
unification by complementarity and correspondence
soul / psyche
imagination
Mental
unification by synthesis and reconciliation
space - world
abstraction
Integral
integrality by integration and presentiation
(conscious spirit)
(concretion)

Structure
7. Consciouness-
a) -degree
b) -relation
Archaic
deep sleep
universe-related: breathing spell
Magic
sleep
outer-related (nature): exhaling
Mythical
dream
inner-related (psyche): inhaling
Mental
wakefulness
outer-related (spatial world): exhaling
Integral
(transparency)
(inware-related: inhaling? or breathing-spell?)







Structure
9. Basic attitude and agency of energy
10. Organ emphasis
Archaic
Origin:
Wisdom
—
Magic
Vital:
InstinctDriveEmotion
Viscera — Ear
Mythical
Psychic:
ImaginationSensibilityDisposition
Heart — Mouth
Mental
Cerebral:
ReflectionAbstractionWill / volition
Brain — Eye
Integral
(Integral):
(Concretion)(Rendering diaphanous)(“Verition”)
(Vertex)

Structure
11. Forms of Realization and Thought
a) Basis
b) Mode
Archaic
—
Originary
Magic
empathy and identificationhearing
Pre-rational, pre-causal, analogical
Mythical
imagination and utterancecontemplation and voicing
Irrational: non-causal, polar
Mental
conceptualization and reflectionseeing and measuring
Rational: causal, directed
Integral
(concretion and integration “verition” and transparency)
(Arational: acausal, integral)

Structure
12. Forms of Expression
13. Forms of Assertion
Archaic
—
—
Magic
Magic:
GravenImagesIdolRitual
Petition (Prayer): being heard
Mythical
Mythologeme:
GodsSymbolMysteries
Wishes (Ideals: Fulfillment “wish(pipe-
dreams”)
Mental
Philosopheme:
GodDogma (Allegory, Creed)Method
Volition: attainment
Integral
(Eteologeme):
(Divinity)(Synairesis)(Diaphany)
(Verition: Present)
These tables represent a mere summarization of the essential features of consciousness evolution. The integral structure is what Gebser identifies as unfolding during this age and suggests that not all people have begun the process of manifesting these characteristics. For Gebser (1986) it is important to remember that this summary, then may have served to illustrate that:
1) All structures constitute us;
2) All structures must be lived commensurate with their constitutive values if we are live a whole or integral life;3) No structure may therefore be negated; negation enters when one structure or the other is overemphasized, whereby this accentuation is transferred to its deficient manifestations, which are always quantitative; 4) Certain designations, ascriptions; and characteristic concepts attributed to the individual structures render their effectuality evident.
We have to ask what implications this transformation of consciousness has for human beings in general, and religious experience in particular. How does an integral human experience the world? One need only compare the difference between the once dominating mental-rational worlds to grasp it. Where mental-rational man treated the world as a perspectival three-dimensional grid to be explored and mapped, and later to be conquered and exploited, integral consciousness experiences the world as “open,” i.e., not reducible to spatial coordinates mapped with dualistic and oppositional systems of thought and matter. Where ideologies and systems once held sway, integral experience seeks to “render whole.” The manners of expression are significantly different as well, integral consciousness expressing awareness, not merely sectored perception. Indeed we may say that perception in integral consciousness is free of perspective and space-time coordinates. Inasmuch as the basic mode of realization and thought is concretion and transparency, we can ask how this differs from the experience of belief, perhaps even religious belief. If belief can be seen to express the previous structures of mythical and mental thought, then the integral may well express the intensification of the magical insofar as it expresses the transparency of the open world that once left magical man mute and in awe. The emphasis here is what was once a source of belief that could be represented and symbolized as projections of belief, now becomes a living testimony to the integrity of one’s experience of spirituality at the core of one’s awareness. This is not to discount belief per se, but to highlight the expansion and change of belief over many millennia. What integral religion will look like is hard to say. Wilbur (2006) suggests that it involves the realization of the transcendent core of all world religions as in essence expressing the elements of the new consciousness. While we do not completely hold to Wilbur’s expression, we acknowledge the importance of highlighting the difference between the mental and integral worlds.
In the mental world, the world is a duality of subjects against objects to be understood, represented, mapped and measured. With integral world all opposites dissolve and what emerges is a conscious participation with the whole marked by the skills of comparing, contrasting, coordinating and integrating experience. Such a human being, says Gebser, should they master the new consciousness, will manifest the values of transparency, openness, a truthful rendering of the whole (verition) and a focus on the divinity at the core of the lived present. In recent years we have witnessed the proliferation of many works whose nod to spirituality focus on being here now and the power of “now.” We would hasten to add that in terms of Gebser’s schema, the power of the now is the power of rendering whole which is an expression of the spiritual whole already having been concretized in the person expressing it. There is also the attendant danger of a deficient understanding of the “Now” as something to be “seized” upon in terms of seizing material wealth or personal power. We find such expressions as a misstatement of the new consciousness and an unfit misuse of the new consciousness. Only those expressions which render the whole transparently (diaphanously) may the spiritual be efficiently expressed as a living dimension in human beings. In terms of religion, then, God is no longer experienced as a mysterious and distant “other,” but is to be found at the core of existence itself. This “distance” is resolved by the experience of oneself as transparent co-present to the spiritual foundations of oneself and the world.
Wilbur (2001) acknowledges the weight of Gebser’s contribution, along with many others, in giving us a holoarchy by way of which we may understand the language of consciousness evolution. Expanding on Gebser’s structures, Wilbur (1996, 1997) creates a quadrant that integrates in the manner of a mandala the all quadrant-all level way of verition as it expresses the depth of the fields mastered in consciousness evolution. These structures and fields once treated as objective regions are seen as tacit to life itself that irrespective of one’s belief system or cosmology are virtually undeniable. Here science seems to meet spirituality, psychology and religion right in the neighborhoods they live and symbolizes the background horizon of their very existence.


In this mandala we see the “grammar” of the new consciousness at work. In order to grasp the mode of givenness of each of the four areas of the quadrant, we need to recognize their mediating consciousness. In other words, each of the four regions of consciousness evolution is based on subjective-objective and right-hand left-hand symmetries. This play on words and on the brain hemispheres is no accident and serves as reminder of the “up from origin” view of consciousness evolution. Seen holarchically then, joining all the 1’s to the 1’s, the 2’s to the 2’s, etc, gives us the depth and span of each level of consciousness evolution. These are easily situated in Gebser’s tables and perhaps add a more comprehensive understanding that as complexity grows there is less span and more depth acquired as we integrate previous layers and levels of the holoarchy of consciousness evolution. By viewing it in terms of individual subjective (I and We) interior phenomena and exterior objective It realities, we may get a better grasp of how they fold into one another. The following table illustrates it:
INDIVIDUAL
INTERIORLeft Hand Paths
SUBJECTIVE
truthfulnesssincerityintegritytrustworthiness
I
EXTERIORRight Hand Paths
OBJECTIVE
truthcorrespondencerepresentationpropositional
it
COLLECTIVE
we
justnesscultural fitmutual understandingrightness
INTERSUBJECTIVE
it
functional fitsystems theory webstructural-functionalismsocial systems mesh
INTEROBJECTIVE

In order to fully understand the functional fit of this expansion of Gebser, we need to grasp the tenets of its operation. What follows is a summary of Wilbur’s (1996) tenets regarding holarchies so that we may fold the mandala up into it proper layers and levels.
· (1) Reality as a whole is not composed of things, or processes, but of holons.
· Holons display four fundamental capacities:
· (2a) self-preservation,
· (2b) self-adaptation,
· (2c) self-transcendence.
· (2d) self-dissolution.
· (3) Holons emerge.
· (4) Holons emerge holarchically.
· (5) Each emergent holon transcends but includes its predecessor.
· (6) The lower sets the possibilities of the higher; the higher sets the probabilities of the lower.
· (7) "The number of levels which a hierarchy comprises determines whether it is 'shallow' or 'deep'; and the number of holons on any given level we shall call its 'span'" (A. Koestler).
· (8) Each successive level of evolution produces greater depth and less span.
· (9) Destroy any type of holon, and you will destroy all of the holons above it and none of the holons below it.
· (10) Holarchies coevolve.
· (11) The micro is in relational exchange with the macro at all levels of its depth.
· Evolution has directionality:
· (12a) Increasing complexity.
· (12b) Increasing differentiation/integration.
· (12c) Increasing organization/structure
· (12d) Increasing relative autonomy.
· (12e) Increasing telos.
Key to perceiving the interrelationships of Wilbur’s mandala are the first six tenets. Aside from the fact that they have received repeated mathematical and scientific validation in quantum physics (Laszlo, 2005), these tenets are keys to unlocking our own identities in terms of understanding and mastering time-freedom (Gebser, 1985). “What the Bleep Do We Know?” the famous film of 2005 established the place of such thinking in terms of describing ordinary day to day life in terms of complexity lived in simple terms.

Combs (2002) suggests that with increasing complexity comes an attendant chaos. The new consciousness, as Gebser (1985) says, is marked by an intensification of awareness, a demand for presentifying the whole. Truth is no mere correspondence of subject to object, but the surpassal of all dualities in favor of verition, an experience of transparently being present as the truth of experience. This suggests that events do not happen, they are already there and we meet them on our way. He asserts that the “formality” of “taking place” is merely an indication that the observer has passed beyond the event in question, and this formality is of no great importance. What is of importance is what this suggests about the individual experience of time: it is a new intensity to be mastered through verition, aperspectivity and atemporality. This is no longer a process of ego syntony, but one that dissolves the ego, and thereby its oppositional nature, in favor of the whole.
We are living in a world in which we witness horrific and violent collapse. It is a collapse not merely of cultures and countries in which depravation and physical and psychological oppression are witnessed, but the collapse of reason itself. Sloterdik (1988) delivers a devastating presentation of reason gone mad from the Enlightenment to contemporary times. Reason, he suggests, ultimately turned on itself becoming less reasonable and more like a paranoid patient. This collapse is based on what Gebser identifies as the sectorization and fragmentation of the world into spatial sectors of dominance and might. Governments, corporations and cultures turned against themselves in a frenzy of dissolution and despair. The so-called humanities can do no more than descry and describe a world whose collapse they helped engender. The sciences are used to promote profitable venture capitalism over an equitable benefit accessible to all. Acting like an abusive parent, many governments haunt their citizens with threats of evils that may not exist, but serve the ruling elite’s need for absolute might. Power, if it is exists at all, has been diminished to such a degree that individual’s in many countries find that ordinary life is driven by a maze of laws and ordinances. Life for many becomes a dark destiny of relinquished rights. Harry Stack Sullivan (1968) once diagnosed this loss of individual integration with respect to what he saw as the passivity and dependence of Americans on strong parental authority figures asserting that, in his view, that the American people were quite possibly the only people on earth who run the danger of democratically voting themselves into slavery. But these examples are only exemplars, the real point is that as the collapse of reason and systems proceeds two things become obvious: one, that people everywhere are challenged with a kind of internal collapse of the mental rational structure and that we are witnessing whole groups, nations, corporations, churches and cultures harping on the need to return to traditional values to stem the tide of chaos and evil reigning in the world. Two, the ever more manifest appearance of the integral consciousness being expressed in high contrast to the call to return to the past signals what Pargament (1997) calls the transformation of significance. We are living in a world where self-mastery no longer means the domination of the strong over the weak, of might over meekness, but one that demands an integration of the past, present and future.
What impact does this have on the psychology of religion? What bearing does it have on the experience of belief and faith? How will traditional religious organizations respond to a new and expanded cosmology based as much on science as it is on the experience of one’s own consciousness? Pargament (1997) iterates that religion is much an orienting system in terms of one’s experience of meaning and significance. Given that Spilka et al (2003) devote an entire text of validated research to the various developmental, organizational, behavioral and psychological views of religion, it will come as no surprise that the tension between the new consciousness structure and traditional churches and systems of belief are symptomatic of the question of how to manage chaos from within and whether or not individuals and churches will be able to assimilate it. It appears that this is not merely a sociological or psychological question, though there will be those who wish to “place” the new consciousness in a context that makes sense in terms of the previous structures. In some way this might be a comfort to those struggling with what Pargament (1997) identifies as the tension between conservation and transformation. What is essential for psychologists to recognize is that an integral religion will emerge from this tension and what it will look like in its expression remains difficult to gauge. Clearly an integral religion will be based on an integral spirituality devoid of absolutism or relativism because neither can sustain themselves in the process of verition. Additionally the individual mastery of the surpassal of time to time-freedom may, in some eyes, be seen as a kind of destiny. But this can be no mere passive encounter with spirituality for as Gebser (1986) in “The Transformation of the West” said “only he who chooses his own destiny is liberated from it because he has brought himself into harmony with the whole. In other words, when I genuinely resign myself to accepting my destiny, I change it. Instead of losing myself in nothingness, instead of radically alienating myself from the world, I gain the open world, the fullness of the conscious participation in the whole – this whole necessarily encompasses the future. My life becomes transmuted from a mere serial duration into authentic presence. All time becomes actual, as each of us is already what he will soon be. When I accept my destiny, I accept my own future: that is, I free myself from the blindness inherent to both. My existence, then, is not a being-toward-death, but a living and dying.” (Gebser, p. 10)
This statement defies traditional belief systems of churches and “serial” religions, i.e., religions that embrace teleological and eschatological foundations. To make the individual responsible for integrating the living present through himself/herself is precisely what Gebser (1985) had in mind when he said that for those who are not ready to embrace the new intensities, time will become a source of dread and foreboding, everything will be cast with a pall of doom, or the end of time will be descried as a source of great fear and negativity. “If we look at our contemporary world, regardless of the aspect we choose to emphasize, be it political, social, cultural or religious, what can indeed, what must we conclude? The world is shattering. In the last one hundred and fifty years the world has slowly but inexorably fallen to pieces, no matter which of its domains: religious bonds, traditionally stable social structures, craft security of workmen, political structures of whole nations, to be sure, of whole continents. But the world does not shatter, but certainly space does, namely, the spatial world and the illusory quality of oppositeness relative to us which we represented to ourselves, thinking that these constitute the real world.” (Gebser, p. 11)
How then can we as psychologists assist those facing this collapse and the emergence of a new consciousness with new modes of realization and expression, especially when they do not fit what Pargament (1997) describes as the “conservation of value?” All religions now seem to be faced with a crisis of conservation vs. transformation. But perhaps this is a false dichotomy. Certainly there are decisions made by either camp in terms of what to preserve or what to change. It is a balancing act either way for belief is being surpassed by an ability that demands that belief be itself transmuted into a new kind of faith that is based on an a presentification of the whole through oneself. Here neither conservation nor transformation can negotiate change for it is not mere change we are experiencing, but the transformation of the entire field of experience to one that by passes duality in favor of the whole. The conservation of value itself must become one where the values transformed through the whole become the inner markers of a new world perception and experience revealing a new richness of expression and where boundaries once heretofore marked psychologically become activated as new skills of perception and appreciation, compassion and empathy. While it is certainly true that people have their own inner blocks to such experiences, it also belies the fact that they already know there is something radically different occurring in the realm of faith that has not been seen before. What may trouble those who wish to stay in the conservation or transformation camp is the disturbing fact that the new consciousness appears to be no respecter of persons, i.e., the unfolding dimension seems to subvert individual egocentric thought towards an ever increasing participation in the whole.
For example, Gebser (1985, 1986) emphasizes the correlation of soul with the concretion of the spiritual. Does such an emphasis change the focus we have from a psychology of religion and spirituality founded on belief and faith to one based on the energetics of soul? Laszlo (2005) outlines the interface of quantum realities with psychological phenomena which lie far beyond the boundaries of ego beliefs and manifest more of the transpersonal and psychic dimensions of experience. Gebser (1985) said in 1948 that he suspected as the new consciousness manifested itself that parapsychology would most likely be the arena in which the most stunning revelations of the implications of the new consciousness. Clearly traditional mental rational churches will be challenged by such phenomena of remote viewing, healing at a distance, near death experiences, telesomatic medicine, superconductivity and the like. Dream research has long been involved in looking at the spiritual implications of the dream in relation to understanding consciousness (Krippner, 1990) In this respect we are dealing with a phenomena that will perhaps require a new psychology, or at the very least, a new branch of psychology. We mention these phenomena to serve as exemplars that situate the significance of the question of transformation for religions and how people will cope with the new reality. The challenge for conservation advocates will perhaps be to preserve the efficient modes of realization and expression of the previous structures while avoiding the denial of the new consciousness by devolving into dogma and ideology as a form of resistance to the new paradigm.
The impact of this transformation of consciousness, I believe, challenges psychology to its core and raises the question as to whether psychology is adequate to the task. Clearly the new consciousness is not merely a new psychological construct, and while psychology may try to research its implications for psychological beings, it seems almost that by default their discourse will appeal most to those who remain in the mental-rational egocentric world and for whom it will continue to reinforce their belief in belief systems as having pre-eminence over anything new. The double bind for us, in my view, is that we may be faced with having to first master the new consciousness in ourselves and all that that may imply for our own lives before we can assist others who are struggling with the entire question of spirituality and faith in a rapidly transforming world. In such a case, we will be obliged to master ourselves in terms of the new reality, in which case I suspect we may no longer be practicing “psychology.” What it will be called remains to be seen, but along with my colleague Rod Hemsell (2002), I hold to the view that the new consciousness is not psychological, cannot be mediated philosophically but presages the exercise of a Conscious Force that is descending to us, is bowing down to the earth and humanity in order to lift it. As Wilbur (2006) suggests any integral spirituality must recognize the universal transcendent core of the world’s spiritual tradition, but I also believe we are also obliged to recognize that was is coming has no opposite across from it and nothing to compare it to for it is, I suspect, incomparable and beyond the realms of reflective thought and emotion. It is we ourselves perhaps come round at last to bring ourselves home.

Araya, Daniel (2002) Integral Religion: Uniting Eros and Logos from www.integralworld.net/araya.html

Combs, Allan (2002) The Radiance of Being: Understanding the Grand Integral Vision; Living the Integral Life New York, NY: Omega Books

Gadamer, Hans-Georg (1989) Truth and Method New York, NY: Continuum Publishing

Gebser, Jean (1986) Abendlandische Wandlung Schaffhausen, SW: Novalis Verlag

Gebser, Jean (1999) Asien Lachelt Anders Schaffhausen, SW: Novalis Verlag

Gebser, Jean (1985) The Ever-Present Origin Athens, OH: Ohio University Press

Gebser, Jean (1975) Verfall und Teilhabe Schaffhausen, SW: Novalis Verlag

Heidegger, Martin (1962) Being and Time San Francisco, CA: Harper Books

Hemsell, Rod (2002) Ken Wilbur and Sri Aurobindo: A Critical Perspective at http://intyoga.online.fr/kw_sa.htm

Krippner, Stanley, Ph.D. (1990) Dreamtime and Dreamwork New York, NY: Jeremy Tarcher/Perigree Books

Laszlo, Ervin (2005) Science and the Akashic Field New York, NY: Inner Traditions

Pargament, Kenneth (1997) The Psychology of Religion and Coping: Theory, Research, Practice New York, NY: Guilford Press

Ponty, Merleau (2002) The Phenomenology of Perception New York, NY: Routledge

Sloterdik, Peter (1988) The Critique of Cynical Reason Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota Press

Spilka, Bernard, Hunsberger, Bruce, Gorsuch, Richard, & Hood, Ralph (2003) The Psychology of Religion New York, NY: Guilford Press

Sullivan, Harry Stack (1968) The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry New York, NY: W.W. Norton

Wilbur, Ken (2006) Integral Spirituality from http://www.uvm.edu/giee/Tom/spirit/docs/IntegralSpirituality.html

Wilbur, Ken (2001) Sex, Ecology and Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution Boston, MA: Shambala

Wilbur, Ken (1996) A Brief History of Everything Boston, MA: Shambala

Wilbur, Ken (1997) The Eye of Spirit: An Integral Vision for a World Gone Slightly Mad Boston, MA: Shambala

Wilbur, Ken (2000) Integral Psychology: Consciousness, Spirit, Psychology, Therapy

In the Twinkling of an Eye

What is given forgets all measures of place,
long since gone by us as our sight is restored.

Now comes innocence with every and each,
the hour of the Beloved sung across the Earth.

In the twinkling of an eye all is gently seen,
we are all twins destining ourselves awake.

We are the same, we say, knowing full deep,
God resides in me just as He resides in you.

Let the celebration begin, like a Polish wedding,
dancing we embrace the circle of Light within us.

A dancing flame carrying each other on high,
from heart-to-heart a wind knowing our name.

Not a word can capture what descends to us,
yet a name is written on the door of all hearts.

Let the days come as if they had been planned,
but feel the root energies born as you be new.

Love comes with no fame offers no real glory,
I look in your sweet eyes and laughter rises.

You sip water and lay your head in my cleft,
familiar this time and place, born of tomorrow.

We sleep like children free of the ancient rule,
leaving the machine worlds behind, we drift.

We sit on a forgotten beach under stars of love,
time gone on vacation, space gone out on a date.

Along comes a mysterious creature swimming,
its shining blue eyes dreaming a different world.

We look up seeing the adamantine sparkling,
tracing our joy in each others palms, smiling.

©John Kadela

Birds of Paradise

The sea delivers summer again,
dreams roll in and we softly doze.

The days are no longer an enemy,
seasons liberated roll to our feet.

Gone are zombie days, nomad
nights; we are found as elegant.

Birds of Paradise we are become,
feet in the depth, heads in the sky.

Love is the measure of this ground,
mapped by inner eyes wide awake.

Dreamlessly the true men slept,
breathing us in, breathing us out.

Afternoon rain falls in droplets,
the words we speak rebirthing us.

We watch the news neutral now,
knowing it is all perfectly handled.

We create clouds just for our fun,
slipping between palm fronds too.

Shadow is gone and we call out,
come forth, come forth to us all.

Up and down a coast never born,
we find each other and embrace.

Worm holes are our new eyes,
the speed of light our new skill.

In the chambers of each other,
our hearts are become sacred.

You laugh and ask if I dare, I
do, and the storms leave us.

In the end there is no end,
no math to predict the truth.

Our dreams become our friends,
maps of worlds yet to be made.

© John Kadela

Jean Gebser's Last Essay

Gebser, Jean. (Jan.-Feb. 1974). The Integral consciousness. Main currents.30:3, 107–9.
*Gebscr's main work is Ursprung und Gegenwart, 2 vols., Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstall. See the translation from this. "Foundations of the Aperspective World." in Main Currents 29,2 . pp. 80-88, November-December 1972.

THE GROWTH OF A NEW. INTEGRAL CONSCIOUSNESS is important, even decisive, for our times, for it is a theme of universal scope, embracing the whole of humanity. As such, it deserves to be treated as a coherent whole, for the common destiny of Asia and the Occident depends largely upon the extent to which this new consciousness is realized. The uniqueness of the Integral consciousness lies in the fact that it is in no way based upon the increase of intellectual knowledge, which may be misunderstood or misapplied. The new consciousness has nothing to do with such knowledge; its character is derived from spiritual, not from purely intellectual, values. It can, however, make clear to us that which has heretofore been incomprehensible, even unthinkable, and explain relations which have, at best, been merely matters of conjecture.
It is precisely because Asia and the Occident are not mutually exclusive opposites, but are mutually complementary poles (which may very well one day rediscover their common roots), that it is important for this conscious- ness to be coherently and fully explored. This now becomes even more necessary in view of the fact that my earlier publications have been mainly concerned with providing evidence of the dawning of the Integral consciousness and of the forms it has taken in the Occident in recent decades, and have not addressed themselves sufficiently to the unique character of this new constellation of consciousness.
It is difficult to find the right name—the most fitting and appropriate designation—for something new. Sri Aurobindo and Deisetz Teitaro Suzuki, for example, have each given a different name to what is essentially the same phenomenon: this new consciousness. We have called it "integral" and "a-rational," and have, moreover, emphasized that it is above all "time-free," a designation which is in keeping with Western terminology.
Let us then consider what is to be understood by such a description as an "a-rational, integral consciousness, free of time." Many people will say that these are difficult, even incomprehensible notions, and that whether we understand their meaning will, in (he end, not matter at all. But any- one who believes that it is sometimes good as well as constructive to come to grips with a problem which touches the very foundations of our everyday life (to say nothing of the future which is helping to shape our present) will agree that a problem concerning our consciousness is worth thinking about.
Our conception of what we call reality depends upon our mode of consciousness. For example, reality, as it is understood by many Asiatics, Africans, American Indians and other non-European peoples, is not the same as it is for Westerners, because they do not see the world as the correlate of their own ego. We, on the other hand, regard everything from the point of view of our ego-consciousness. For us, the world is a tangible reality which confronts us: Here am I, there is the world. We believe ourselves capable of managing this world by means of external techniques because we are strongly conscious of our position in space and time—we must be conscious of our stance, for without this conscious knowledge we should be egoless, indeed timeless, as are the representatives of those non- European cultures just mentioned. Their consciousness is to a certain extent dreamlike; it knows little of ego or of lime. The same could also have been said of Europeans several thousand years ago, before we awoke to an aware- ness of the ego in the world, and thereby learned to regard time and space as tangible values. Thanks to this mental and ego-centered waking awareness we were able to shape our reality anew: We saw reality as objective to ourselves as subject, and thereby created science and made technology possible.
Yet. in spite of all the so-called progress we have made, in spite of all our achievements, we are threatened by a danger which becomes greater and more apparent day by day and which cannot be over-stressed: the danger that our identification with the ego may become too strong—that it may harden and degenerate into egocentricity, until we lose the ability to fructify conscious human relations and may even, eventually, become inhuman. Many people today feel that ego-development is leading to a fatal imbalance, even to the point of threatening our whole Western culture. The threat arises from the fact that excessive ego-centricity, which is associated with unbridled possessive- ness and lust for power, results in a corrosive materialism and a ruthless disregard for the essential quality of human life. It leads finally to loss of the ability to apprehend those ' transcendent values which Asia still knows better than we do.
Today, many are endeavoring to escape these consequences by trying to return to a state of timelessness and egolessness without, however, being aware that they are doing so. They turn for help to (misunderstood) yoga training, or join Eastern communities whose purposes are little understood in Europe. In these, however, only the teachers (who are regarded as holy) and the community itself have any significance, and therefore those who seek refuge in such traditions of necessity lose their ego. Again, if Aldous Huxley's intercession on behalf of mescaline was a first falsification of the experience of felicity, the "psychedelic experiment" has been a crime against our young people, whose true longings to avoid the taints of material- ism were misled by false promises and fatal means. It has been suggested that LSD and other drugs can provoke the same sensations of self-release, bliss and escape from the world as, for example, those described in the Tibetan Book of the Dead. To equate the hallucinations artificially engendered by chemicals with the experiences won only after decades of spiritual training is to submit to a delusion based upon the grossest kind of materialistic thinking. That which is to be achieved only by mental application and spiritual discipline leads, as a result of psychic non-discipline, to ruin instead of enlightenment; the result is regression, a weakening or lowering of awareness instead of its necessary and integrating intensification. These negative attempts to master our situation are not an overcoming, but rather a falling back, because those who act thus fall below the possibilities of the waking consciousness, which we have acquired through thousands of years of effort.
There is another way, however, which overcomes egoism and leads to the freedom of the ego. That is to say, it leads to a newly-unfolding, truly awake consciousness, free both from attachment to "egoness" and "egolessness"—a consciousness that deliberately integrates the two states. When this is achieved by the individual, something very significant—indeed, saving—happens. His consciousness, and thereby his reality, take on a richness and abundancy of life heretofore not believed possible. A person who has such an Integral consciousness is no longer dependent on his ego: His ego, with all its passions, no longer dominates him; rather, he governs his ego. Then the world as a correlate of ego—a world which confronts us with all its conditions of time and space—becomes a shared world, a world of participation in that which, like the divine or the spiritual, is not linked to time and space because it is, by its very nature, timeless and spaceless. If we succeed in overcoming both egolessness and egoness by consciously integrating them, our mental, ego-centered waking consciousness is transformed into an Integral, fully awake consciousness, free from time and ego. By this means we overcome the fatal danger that threatens our culture today—the danger that we may perish of ego-hardening and the fall into complete materialism.
This concept of an Integral, time-free consciousness is neither Utopian nor illusory; neither is it a form of wishful thinking. On the contrary, it represents and shapes a richer reality. The dawning of this new consciousness, with its new conception of reality, is today becoming visible in many different fields, in the West as well as in the East. Like everything new, it strikes one at first as extremely strange, although it is simply an intensification of the possibilities of our consciousness. It is a spiritual process which, though painful, brings with it the assurance that if it can be consciously achieved, we ourselves, the world, and indeed all humanity will move towards a new and positive reality.
To think of this achievement, even as a possibility, will not be an easy matter for everyone. In order to be able to see it clearly––us the present age, so full of imminent catastrophe, demands one must cast off all prejudice and break old and outmoded habits of thinking. One condition for this is that we become so well-acquainted with ourselves that we become "self-transparent"—that we accept the active roles of the Archaic, Magical and Mythical Structures which help to constitute us, and do not attribute exclusive validity to the Mental-Rational Structure.* In order to achieve the clear-sightedness whereby we can recognize the efficacy of all these structures without either falling back into magical superstition or enchantment, or sinking into mythical dreaming or irrationality, what is required of us is just that which no one is particularly willing to undertake—work on oneself. The world and its humanity will under no circumstances be changed by preaching a better world; would-be "reformers," in their efforts to achieve a better world, often demand of others what they have not required of themselves.
Of course, such a transformation will not be easy for those who still try to shape and master their lives entirely on the basis of the Mental-rational attitude. It will be much easier for the younger generation to realize the dimensions of the new consciousness which we have called "aperspectival," as well as "a-rational" and "integral." These different terms, although pointing to one and the same thing, derive from the different spheres of experience in which the new form of consciousness is already revealing itself. For this generation has been born into a climate of change, wherein the new consciousness is breaking through into the light.
The idea that the younger generation is born into the climate of a new structure of consciousness is difficult to accept unless we think of the concept of cultural evolution in somewhat different terms, for it requires acceptance of the fact that the new consciousness manifests itself of its own accord, that is, arises naturally and spontaneously in man, in the world and in time, by becoming "transparent" in them. So long as we are unable to free ourselves from the conventional routines of thought which have now become anachronistic and therefore erroneous, we will think of cultural evolution as a process that urges us toward a goal in a linear progression. So long as we attribute exclusive validity to a pragmatically narrow definition of progress by ____etion (?), the assumption that a generation can be "born into" a new consciousness is impossible.
If we are not able to free ourselves from a narrow, one- sided view of evolution which does not include other perspectives of time and transformation. we shall remain fixed within the rationally postulated limits of events and thereby fail to break out of the rational cul-de- sac. It was for this reason that we called the first part of Ursprung un Gegenwart "A Contribution to the History of the Awakening of Consciousness." There was no mention there of the evolution of consciousness, for while history is an active process, evolution is only a partial view of this process and its limitations a view that arises from perspective of the Mental-Rational Structure. The manifestation of the new consciousness is not a milestone on the path to a so-called higher development; it is rather, on the one hand, an enrichment and intensification of the human consciousness and, on the other, our conscious response to the Integral Structure of the world, which through us be- comes transparent. This invisible process activates in us the new consciousness that has always been latent in us. Evolution, from this point of view, is the evolving (e = from, Volvere = proceeding, forming) of man's hitherto latent possibilities of consciousness, which are released by a corresponding supplementary "involution" of the Integral component of the world-consciousness: that involution {in = inward) in the terrestrial sphere is answered by its other pole, awakening—our readiness at a given time for the Integral and time-free consciousness; to evolve from within us.
Whoever has ennobled, intensified and prepared his consciousness, so that an enrichment of the Integral consciousness is achieved, lives in a state of participation in the world as a whole. This participation, which is conditioned by the Integral consciousness and which, even now, is to be found in individuals in every part of the world, holds the possibility for the healing of the world. It will depend on those few who are already consciously realizing this process and who are, thus, enabling the new forces to take effect in the individual, the world and humanity.
*See especially pages 86-88 which describe the Magical, Mythical, Mental/Rational and Integral Structures of Consciousness and Culture in Main Currents 29, 2.

Jean Gebser was. from 1967. Honorary Professor for Comparative Studies of Civilizations at the University of Salzburg. The preceding paper was given us by Prof. Gebser prior to his death.

She Left

She left little gifts planted in people for me,
just so I would know exactly what she felt.

It wasn’t an obvious sort of thing, as it could,
but it sure was a surprise to hear it out loud.

A bank officer, a financial planner, a secretary,
the dentist, the receptionist, the insurance agent.

They all said the same thing, and it isn’t important
I say it here, just know gems fell from their mouths.

I would, I suppose, have expected nothing less,
such would only have come from heaven’s ways.

She left with little fanfare, in less than 8 hours,
tubes helped her breathe, she knew when to go.s w

This my younger brother and sister don’t know,
this is left to me to explain, never expecting it.

I always knew it would be a rushed surprise,
she was taken aback so fast God called her Home.

But she was done, just as I will be and you will be,
if we are not already done, the word not yet here.

So we breathe and remember and remember
to breathe; this is what mother’s actually teach.

Of course, we forget, just like car keys on the
table, the test left behind, our flies left open.

Little nudges and reminders, a word of caution,
and so every birthday card I forgot reminds me.

We are golden light and soul blue harmonies,
in the end the bouquets are just metaphors.

Tomorrow is a surgery for another friend,
Eric left last summer without warning at all.

So we lie like rubber dolls in intensive care,
our mouths agape, nothing to say in the end.

Leaving in the arms of the Beloved we leave
our soul’s name a breath written on our brow.

We are infected with silences unheard,
yet is a voice heard on the road to Bethany.

It is there I shall lay spray her ashes.

© John Kadela

Home is where the Spirit of Christ reigns eternally, and that is in the heart. Where there is love, there we have found home.-

John-Roger(From: Timeless Wisdoms, Vol. 2)

Please feel free to enter comments on the posts. I am encouraging a dialogue regarding various topics: consciousness, spirituality, the Akashic Records, literature, poetry and film. Have a favorite piece of literature, a spiritual focus or scientific interest in consciousness? Jump in...you are welcome here!

The Valuation of the Concretion of the Spiritual

John Kadela, Ph.D. (2005)
Institute for Multi-Millennial Education

The first thing to be said is that the spiritual is irreducible to anything we say about it. Maybe that keeps us honest in our approach, because Gebser was clear that the “how,” the manner of our approach to opening to the new consciousness, itself and opening in us, is a key to the outcome. If we say that the degree of our choosing to accept can impact on not only what we value in the process, but how and who it affects, it may also impact on our very perception of the reality we are experiencing. Additionally, since there is no semantic differential we can deploy to mediate the experience; it might come as no surprise that Gebser says any attempt to force time into a system will simply lead to its bursting apart by the intensities attempting to manifest themselves. If this is true of a system, and we are daily reminded of it on the evening news, then what of its impact on a human being?

The intensities, the spiritual energies seeking manifestation through us, if we may say that, are not something “out there” which threaten us, but are already within us as constellation of predisposed spiritual energies. They are predisposed to us not merely as latencies or structures not-yet-realized – this is to keep things in a language of mediation – but as a living multi-dimensional presence. Here we are safe in saying that the concretion of the spiritual is not a mental experience, and conversely, not an intellectual accomplishment. In this sense, the realization of a new perception of reality is a process of discovery, a process of self-discovery and self-practice which each human will have to undergo each in his or her own way.

Does this in any way suggest that a kind of relativism, an ambivalence about a subjectivity somewhere being transformed? That would be high-altitude thinking that Gebser, I believe, would not accept as appropriate to our discussions. In fact, this manifestation of the spiritual in its most imaginable qualitative intensities, the bursting of system and personal rigidities, have, and will continue to lead, I believe, to a kind of personal earthquake which for individuals awakening to this reality may feel Biblical in proportion (hence the danger of misinterpreting what is occurring in intellectual terms has its own set of dangers). “Our new situation requires new means of description and statement. The new components that have irrupted into our reality demand new ‘concepts.’ But when we begin to sense the truly new, it is no longer new; it has already occurred. We do not render its design; rather our consciousness must recover it. It is pointless to ‘master’ this situation, at least intellectually, in a world of disintegrating patriarchy. But we can face our situation in a humane way and supersede it by becoming conscious of our entire humanity as well as by clearing away all our self-constructed obstructions and conceptions which run counter to the new before they – and this also means us – are done away with by the new.” (Gebser, 1986)

The temptation will be to rush out and begin to identify the new statements and descriptions, and there is nothing wrong with such an endeavor. But temptation always leads us a little further down the road, a little deeper into the crossfire of the uncertain. Uncertainty is not, as Gebser might say, something one masters, but something that one accedes to in perceiving the new reality – and in this case, the uncertain may well simply be translated into the temptation to codify the new reality when, as Gebser says, it will resist every attempt to do so.

For some this may mean a kind of chaos theory of life, something a Nietzschean might see as an opportunity for the whip to be brought out, and as a way of showing off one’s mastery of chaos and the creative shaping of a new life expression. On the other hand, it may also mean a trans-valuation of values that require a greater intuition of the divine wellspring that feeds one’s individual unfolding and concretion of the spiritual in daily life. There is a teasing statement in Gebser’s commentary, particularly where he asserts, “when we begin to sense the truly new, it is no longer truly new; it has already occurred.” There is, of course, the time tease in there, but I sense that there is something there that is transparently present that is simultaneously relevant for the individual as well as n-dimensional. Indeed, I am tempted to say that the new reality, as Gebser teases us, is not something out there, but something precious to the core of our humanity, and may well be, as he, Aurobindo, and so many others tell us, a key to the spiritual transformation of the human.

In this sense, then, the question of subjectivity is truly transcendental, as Husserl and Landgrebe so magnificently realized for us, because its origin is always already present, it is always already then not-any-longer “human” as its primordial being as divine always already lies ahead of us as the new reality to be discovered as the pivot of the human-becoming-divinely awakened. What implications this has for psychology, sociology, economics, politics and the like remains to be seen. What isn’t disputable is that this realization is taking place in all of us. The genius of Gebser, and those of his stature, is they traced out for us a remarkable process that is both individual and integral, is not reducible to system, or mental rational equivocation, but a process in which the evolution of consciousness itself as traced by Gebser is itself, as Gebser repeatedly said, a supplement to the primacy of the concretion of the spiritual.

Taking such things into consideration, then, a delightful play in the integral fields is to ask how Nietzsche and Aurobindo might be seen integrally through one another. Is the Overman an expression similar to Aurobindo’s claim that inconscient nature becoming conscious through a higher Absolute which transmutes human consciousness into a higher expression of the divine? For me, the answer is an obvious yes, but is that because I am willing to allow that in the absence of a programmatic yoga mantra that induces a higher vibratory range of consciousness experience, experiences that leads to out of body experiences, that Nietzsche could have been tracing the implications of such an awareness as key to the Overman. Somehow, at some opening in ourselves to this consciousness, such questions become meaningless, perhaps even silly, for it is not, as we may come to realize, in the words or philosophical concepts that the answer lies, but in our willingness to dissolve contention and dualisms born of culture or personal predilections, for a higher vibration of wonder to expand our vision enough to realize that we didn’t get here without help. The world without opposite, the integral insight is not something we did out of an act of will. If that isn’t obvious at this point, it is pointless to discuss Gebser or anyone else.

The new reality is not a production of universal philosophical objectivity or subjectivity. It is, as Gebser says, “already there.” Our job is to discover it in and through our own recovery, if you will, of having been unaware of it. Divine, spiritual, or integral consciousness (however you want it in words, you can have it), it would seem, is not unlike when we lose our car keys and wander around the house looking for them, only to discover they are in our hands. It is not a function of memory that helps us discover the keys, but an expansion of our awareness that reveals them to have been there all along.Saying such things doesn’t always help the situation. We are still creatures conditioned to the herd energy of the marketplace, media and technology, a paradox of integration that will not, in the final analysis, allow us to merely sit back in some kind of effete judgment and declare technology evil and being a Breath-Arian a true liberation of the human spirit. Overcoming such conditioning is the temptation, for we think that it can be done by will, but Gebser, and so many others, are so clear about this that they beat the drum around it ceaselessly warning us against believing that the new reality is something we somehow artistically, philosophically, linguistically, psychically, magically or scientifically cajole into yielding its riches to us.

The values of the new reality will not be perceivable to us until we let go of the beliefs born of the values of the previous structures. This does not mean their dissolution or denial, but an openness to stop willing and let be. For where thinking was the valuation process of the mental-rational, as we know, being is the manifestation of the aperspectival realization. It is not any longer that things have limitations, but that things are realized how they have become a de-limitation, an opening to a new freedom and horizon of perception in which the Origin, God, the Absolute, or whatever you want to call it this week, is in all beings. Clearly the values of the new reality are not based in thought and emotion, for thought and emotion merely reduce experiences into partialized attachments, concepts and ego viewpoints that lead to contention and debate. It is when we recognize that the integral phenomenon, the concretion of the spiritual is not merely something already there, but is the prophecy in every phenomenon, or what Picasso called the “secret structures of the world,” by which, we already know, he meant the aperspectival and atemporal perception of the world and nature. As I am sure many in this room can attest, when you risk expressing the new reality and how it is impacting on your consciousness, you have been no less an avant-garde presence in your world than Picasso was to his, for you sound like a totally chaotic, indifferent, self-indulgent egotist to those who refuse to participate in their own unique process of sharing the concretion of the spiritual. And since it is obvious that it is not a uniform process, any more than karma or dharma is for eastern thought,

I believe Gebser and Wilbur are correct in saying that only the coming decades will tell the tale whether humanity embraced the whole with love and primal trust (as outlined in Verfall und Teilhabe), or whether dissolution and self-rendering will be the outcome.In some sense we may intuit this primal trust as overarching all values, for whatever we fix our gaze in a valuation process, no matter how it stands or streams, Gebser is clear in stating that primal trust is neither a circumstance nor an existential condition. In fact, he says such a trust defies any psychological or ontological explanation because it is already a-temporally bewared as being at home in the invisible. In everyday terms we speak of trust as an action or an agreement struck between two parties. But in that sense trust is already an issue of anxiety and dread, a juridical situation that calls for two parties to take an action to place closure on a rift, a tear in the seam of life. Hence trust in its usual meaning isn’t really about trust at all – it’s about trying to fill in a gap where trust is gone and what has replaced it usually leads to some kind of conflict and opposition; again, the anxiety driven world of opposition and against-ness. Since this is not an epistemological condition, but one that in some sense is born along with epistemology and all its doxologies of meaning and sense, we are, in fact, miles from what Gebser means by primal trust.

For Gebser, primal trust is the prior condition of our being, perhaps the unreflected density of the archaic which is brought to consciousness slowly and cautiously in all the world’s great mystical traditions, for if the new reality is to be recovered, it cannot be done so in the fashion of healing a wound. I believe this is a misreading of the archaic. It has to be in the sense of that which is unconscious in nature and humanity being gradually brought to integration (and how all the previous structures are always co-present to our humanity) and awareness. Whichever way we choose to see it, Gebser is clear it is a “acting without acting,” a repose of stillness and movement, an allowing of the diaphaneity of all things. Primal trust isn’t merely given with the archaic, in some sense, it is recovered as renewed and enlivened, for as Gebser says, “this acting without acting” is the very embodiment of that which is signified here as an ‘inner attitude.’ This ‘innerness,’ -- to incorporate Holderlin’s use of the term – domiciles itself in the invisible. The veritable invisible is Spirit. Therefore, one can dare say: primal trust is participation, a conscious participation with Spirit and a conscious participation with that which is indestructibly and intractably held in Spirit. This way of speaking belongs to what Gebser identifies as the new form of expression, for in it he has succinctly stated the unique relationship primal trust bridges. It is, if you will, participation with Spirit as well as a participation with that which is held indestructibly and intractably in Spirit. This is one of those famous constructions in Gebser where he makes the transparent inner connection between Spirit as such, Itself, and as an inner constellation held by the invisible in Spirit. Perhaps this sounds like non-sense, because we are speaking of Spirit we are not speaking objectively or subjectively, but of something that is free of both, even indifferent to both.

For Gebser the bridge is always to the cosmic and universal consciousness of Spirit as an active field of awareness and evolution, while still being unmoved and unmediated. While we may be tempted to create a dialectical relationship at the heart of Spirit, what Gebser seems to be saying, at least to me, is that it would be an error to read it that way. If anything, primal trust expresses an attitude that is free of any such concern. When brought to conscious awareness and play, primal trust seems to be an inner ray of awareness that is ever silently poised (reposed) and transparently acting without doing anything. Hence, there is nothing for us to master, as Gebser says, because it has already occurred, so to speak, and our “leap,” if you will, is into a full awareness of that and its impact on our whole humanity. In a stunningly simple way, Gebser puts his finger on the pulsating life of the universal that is in the individual and the individual that is the universal itself. They are indeed one and the same, but with myriad rays of manifestation, for if human life is anything, it is an expression of this evolution of the apocryphal as already seeded within us. For some, Gebser realized, this may result in an experience of the Chicken Little sort: the sky is always falling down on those who do not realize the truth within themselves and who have not attained a realization of their own primal trust in a process that resists all attempts to be reduced to system or concept, yet remains a key to personal liberation and spiritual aliveness.

Primal trust is a conscious participation with something that is held in trust in Spirit. It is intractable and indestructible. It’s guaranteed. This is another way of saying that it’s already done, it’s already occurred, but not as a temporal event, but as inner constellation. In this sense, primal trust is not something I do, but a key to who I am and how I participate in Spirit. That it may also contain a key to dissolving the question of values as psychological (and developmental) end points (always in contention) and the ascension of divinity as a primary expression of our humanity. In this sense, primal trust might be seen as an ego-free phenomenon. But is primal trust not merely what we mean when we say “faith?” Yes and no. Yes insofar as primal trust outlasts our doubts and anxieties, and no because that would still be a trust that is based on the notion that I do something. Gebser is, I believe, pointing to something so essentially at the core of our humanity, that it may also well be a key to our transformation.

It is one thing to say that primal trust is a participation in Spirit. Given we are multidimensional geniuses for intuiting with skilled bodies of proprioception able to expand and contract with worlds, our evolution itself both displays and exemplifies itself through those avatars and exemplars themselves who are the Wayshowers, if you will, of the new reality. Such men and women are preceptors, if you will, of the new consciousness structure, and Gebser’s work is replete with examples of them. Even in discussing the Agraphons of Christ, Gebser is clear that such statements as can be identified as having been said, point clearly to a fusion of Origin and Presence in Christ that He both identifies and expands. Among these are: “You shall do these things, and greater,” in reference to his miraculous works, and “I and the Father are One, when you have seen me, you have seen the Father,” as well as “I chose you before the world was created.” This latter obviously referring to the dimensions of time and history reveals a direct connection between Christ and His followers that exemplifies Gebser’s assertion that primal trust is not a psychic or psychological condition, but a way in which we are held in Spirit. That we may have been heretofore unconscious to such awareness is no less forgivable or understandable in the same way that he refers to his “sleeping years” in the 1930’s.

Because we don’t know something in time does not exclude us from the possibility of being awakened to our core dreams and divine imprints in what can only be called “small miracles of perfect timing.” Such “synchronicities,” if you will, tense themselves within us in such ways that we may begin to sense, along with Gebser, that we are held in Spirit by Spirit in some way that we come to discover as a trust, a divine connection between ourselves and our divine consciousness in such a way that it’s unfolding is not something that happens to us, but is, in fact, who we are. If it can be said, read from the side of Spirit, then, we are not dealing with archetypes of the unconscious, but a purpose that has never left the confines of our initial creation: for if Christ chose us before time, we are co-creators and consenters to it. Perhaps in this Spirit we may grasp Gebser’s frequent referrals to our consciousness evolution being itself an expression of this original constellation of our being. This does not mitigate against depth psychology, or the archetypes of the Earth. Indeed, in the unfolding of our awareness of how we are held, and who and how it is we are held, such structures are perhaps necessary that our participation in Spirit is a continuous intensification to a point of individuation in which we are better able to handle the gnosis at the core of our being. The apparent ambivalence of reading primal trust as a being held in Spirit as well as a “how” of participation in Spirit is a tempting interpretation. It would, however, be a tragic reduction to mythic polarity and a de-vitalization of the integral exemplified as an expression of our way of being with Spirit.

“Man,” Gebser says, “is not just a creature of earth; he is also a creature of heaven, if only because he breathes this heaven with every breath (if one will permit the somewhat loose physical description). In every breath the ‘substance’ of even the most remote heavens are present, if only to an infinitesimal degree.” (Gebser,1986) Man is become the bearer, or agent, of the originary consciousness. Even more than this, because it sounds sterile and antiseptic to call it “originary,” man is a participant with the heavens. Interestingly enough, such a reference to breathing heaven is not attributable to Gebser alone, but has precedents in Kriya Yoga, Shabda Yoga and Yoga Manta, as well in mystical alchemical traditions that identify breathing as a key to higher vibrational consciousness and divine awareness. Hence when Christ says: "you too shall do as I", His statement is not one of patriarchal dominance, but one in which He holds in Spirit what is common to all men on earth at all times, which is that all men breathe heaven and earth. A short journey around the alternative health care and healing markets will bring you smack dab into this tradition, for whether one is a Christian, Sufi, Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist, the central role of breathing in perceiving the new reality is ongoing. This is not something that one trusts is the case, as the skeptical scientist might challenge with pristine laboratories and calculators to see if breathing heaven actually can be proved, for such an approach is already one that has lost touch with its own foundations in consciousness, but clearly what Gebser means by saying that we are.

The new reality is a “we” that extends to the stars and beyond, that consciousness is divine in Origin, is our inheritance, not a claim to be proved or disproved, and something we all share in, whether we are ready, willing or able to admit. In that sense, we could say that the Origin, originary consciousness, or whatever you want to call it, is as common as dirt. In Gebser’s sense, and in Wilbur’s expanded sense of the “communal experience” of the validity of the integral, being held is not a passive experience, nor is it a blind instinct that differentiates us from animals. It is a consciously held connection that seems to go both ways: a holding by Spirit that lends itself to our conscious participation. Words like adhering, hearkening, listening and alignment all come to the fore as traditional descriptors of this inner discovery, if you will, which, if seen as Spirit’s interpretation of us (a being to be held) coming to us in the process of our awakening to Spirit’s efficacy in our consciousness. This is how the neither-nor works because we cannot reduce Spirit to our participation with it, i.e., our will to power and life confidence through it (more on this later), nor to just what is held and how it is held for us. In Buddhist traditions there is a statement that says, “The universe is confident in you,” which I believe expresses this connection rather well. Translated into Gebser’s scheme it may sound like “In you I have faith.” While some may read this as a relativization of the expressions, they would seem to belong to the new consciousness, at least in the sense that they express a top-down kind of connection. The bottom-up experience requires some effort on our part, those “pains” of growth Gebser refers to in EPO and elsewhere, suggesting that we have to somehow “position” ourselves and our awareness to give ourselves over to the primal trust that shines within us. This goes along with his statement that “it is pointless to master” it as it is already the surpassing of all self-constructed obstructions and conceptions.

Another way of saying this is that it is we who block the new with our clinging to old associations, concepts, ideations, ideologies, constructions and structures, whose one time master meant success in the world, but now may be experienced as impediments to “breathing heaven.” Shifting it around, “wishes are memories coming from the future” is the transformation of ideologies into responsibilities and capacities in discovery the inner prophecy at the heart of all things: man and heaven are One. This is not an assertion, but a reality to be integrated as the fabric of one’s being. These “truths,” these apparently simple statements, can be earth shattering to one who relies on the outer world for validation and self-image. For it is not merely that we trace the tracings of things, events, expressions, worlds, but the connection is reciprocal, in the same way you cannot separate a person from their walk, by tracing the tracings we are tracing ourselves as well. Instead of thinking truth into being, we are become beings-in-truth, where verition is more than truth telling (mythic) or truth valuing (mental), but is the conscious manifestation of that very valuation of the spiritual that our existence becomes. In this sense authenticity is the expression of primal trust as verition, verition here being the very way the valuation of the concretion of the spiritual is made transparent. As Christ said, “when you have seen me, you have seen the Father,” this was an exemplification of the transparency of truth-in-being that both expresses absolute differentiation as a key to realization without ever once losing sight of the infinite and eternal possibilities born of such a perception.

The visible and invisible are met and individuation as an expression of primal trust, a confidence in the conscious connection with Spirit is discovered as a core element of our humanity. The seeds of transformation are not something we plant, but are buried deep within our evolution and are discovered in their full blossoming power when we bring our focus to bear on it. Naturally, one need not do this – one may choose otherwise, and that is allowed, but as Gebser said, it is better to consciously choose transformation than to have it chosen for one, if for no other reason that one has abrogated their trust in the process and relinquished their freedom, for then all that may occur to an individual may seem like a “cruel fate” or “the strength of destiny,” which more often than not, we realize, ends in tragedy. A self born out of the psychic reaction to the irruption of the new may experience inner earthquakes and self-renderings the likes of which could be seen as the self-fulfilling of apocalyptic writings detailing the end-times. Such “reactions,” or “abreactions,” are not born of a healthy marriage of the visible and invisible in an individual, but a psyche made of concepts and positions, dogmas and cognitive maps and “the devil being in the details.” I believe we have already seen the effects of these inner earthquakes in global events leading to cultural implosions and spiritual holocausts (a continuation of the same holocaust which blighted the20th century from Russia to Auschwitz) in Rwanda, Botswana, Uganda, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Bosnia, Kosovo, Serbia, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Chechnya and Georgia, among others, that expresses the loss of the inner courage that is the primal trust Gebser speaks of. We may refer to past great cultures that have manifested and shown this courage, but it makes little sense in a current climate that rejects the past, particularly the cultural past, as part of a cultural hegemony which is believed in many quarters intent on extinguishing wholesale populations and cultures based on its cultural and technological superiority. The mass murder and torture of millions of people is a reflection of the potential existential abyss of such a choice, a bathing in such an abyss of despair and disconnectedness that Gebser said was unfit for any human.

What appears as catastrophic “out here” is so because it has already been constellated as an event “in there.”Paradoxically, one must accept the comprehensiveness of primal trust in Gebser’s sense. Primal trust is a way of participating in Spirit, conscious or unconscious; I believe that is the way it is. I suppose that is also how it is that primal trust is “held” in Spirit, for even where we see people want to break the world down into “good vs. evil,” “right vs. wrong,” “just vs. unjust,” we know that such dualisms are part of the transparent blindness of a mental-rational world living in anxiety and dread. Yet nowhere is it suggested that this trust, this bond with Spirit, is anywhere broken up in Spirit itself. Repose and movement are a paradox mental consciousness cannot comprehend, so it breaks them up into component parts, as if the mysteries of Spirit were an algebraic equation to be solved for “x.” Good and evil are no more reducible than repose and movement are. We say “is” and not “are” here to highlight the integrated poise of this essential expression of the new reality. We may suspect that Gebser’s emphasis on this has far ranging applications, not the least of which is the resolution of the paradox by virtue of the reality that for good and bad, so to speak, it is all held in Spirit. Held not as a pie-in-the-sky theology, but one that is in our every breathing (hence a clue to clearing those blocks and obstructions) and applies to all our humanity. That trust, it would appear, is elemental to Christ’s statement “I chose you before the world began,” inasmuch as it expresses what Gebser meant when he said it is “indestructibly and intractably held in Spirit.”

It would seem that no amount of intellectualizing would change it, doesn’t it? Spirit holds the trump card in the resolution of all paradoxes. It would also seem to hold the trump card as far as our individuation and will to create goes as well.Primal trust is the way we live, whether we are aware of it or not, whether we accept it or not. We can live in anxiety and dread, if we choose, if we continue to see life as a drama in which we are the victims of unseen forces of fate, destiny, evil and darkness. Either way, we come back to the primal connection. At such a junction it doesn’t seem to matter much if one is a believer in reincarnation or not, because the key is in the living and the creating of choices and outcomes which are not so much a learning curve (though we can to that too), but as our own personal pathway in intensification and awakening. Spirit, it would seem, could care less about our time creations and petty worries about our bodies and minds, but is more interested in our integration with its own nature, so to be speak. This is like saying there isn’t “one world.” There are seven billion potential way-showers on the planet at the present time, just as there are uncountable worlds of consciousness differentiating themselves in every way they are intending to be. Consider that carefully, for in it, I believe, is much to be gleaned, and much to be joyful in celebrating.

Real laughter comes encountering the differences in all their bright glory and a zest for living expresses itself in the peaceful smile that knows all is held as unfolding in a perfect expression that requires no second guessing. Nietzsche spent a lifetime trying to make clear the Will to Power and the Eternal Return of the Same, and in his vital expression, the Tradition was shaken to its foundations, and is still shaking, for what is irrupting is not chaos, not disaster and apocalypse, but the perfect unfurling of a once unconscious nature integrating into a self transforming self creating life. As all contradiction and oppositeness is dissolved and made transparent in its origins as this consciousness comes forward more and more into our lives, what becomes clearer is that the primal trust Gebser speaks of is the bridge from which we may see many events flow in their completeness as having already occurred. In this sense one is not seeing the past or the future, but living with a now that has no limits or boundaries and whose energies, which seen in the ordinariness of daily life, are bursting the seams of our self imposed illusions about self, consciousness, culture, society and world.

The core dream of humanity is a divine unfolding which, at various ©being held in Spirit as already completing and transforming itself because it has been held in Spirit for us to do so; two, however one sees it, repose and movement in all things is something none of us can deny for within ourselves lives the inner connection of primal trust as expression of the divine as the essence of the transformation of the human in the valuation of the concretion of the spiritual. In simpler terms, this is a very fancy way of saying: the blessings already are.

GEBSER, JEAN (1974a). Verfall und Teilhabe. Gesamtausgabe, bd. 5/2, Schaffhausen: Novalis Verlag AG, 1986

GEBSER, JEAN The Ever-Present Origin (Authorized translation by Noel Barstad with Algis Mikunas. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 1986).

AUROBINDO, SRI The Life Divine Lotus Press, Twin Lakes, WI, 1981

NIETZSCHE, FREDERICK The Will to Power. Walter Kauffman & R.J. Hollingdale. Vintage Books 1968

My focus in writing has always been the poem. It challenges the mind and emotion and demands a kind of inner listening only paralleled by music. To be mastered by language requires a kind of surrender only lovers know. The power of words is manifest in the silence which sustains them. Hearing both simultaneously is a spiritual discipline which is ever changing like a stream meandering. It is also a cue to the kind of listening we need to deepen our connections with others in manifesting and mastering our intentions. When we seek to create, even in groups, it is this esthetic I believe we need to bring forward now: loving listening and listening with love.John Kadela, Ph.D.

The Flame

I saw a flame burning in a window of night;
singular it was and without a flickering glow.

I went inside its room without hesitation,
there too I found a silent darkness broken.

It was a darkness yearning for the flame,
its passion for silence keeping it distant.

Wondering what would happen, I blew on
it; nothing happened, the flame stood calm.

Alone with it, I picked it up into my hand,
it held its steady vigil centered in my palm.

Its brilliance revealing its crystalline soul,
a corpuscle of light unwavering in its faith.

I let it fly flipping it upward into the air,
only to discover there was no ceiling.

Up, up it went into the warming dark,
it seemed like it was going out of sight.

Soon it fell back in my outstretched palm,
more dazzling, illuminating without shining.

“This,” I said to myself, “is who we are.”

I let the flame be a beacon in my hand,
round and round burning, consuming dark.

Realizing all direction was met in the flame,
I gently placed it in my heart so I could see.

Breathing in today, it ignited itself in me,
and all around me I saw the room was full.

Faces appeared with bright happy eyes,
meeting in full measure a burning truth.

Seeing thus darkness lit up inside out,
a soft sound rose in each and everyone.

The flame filled the room with its light,
and a song from heaven freed the night.

©John Kadela