102,870
edits
Changes
→Mysticism and the great chain of being
=== Mysticism and the great chain of being ===
=== Mysticism and the great chain of being ===
One of Wilber's main interests is in mapping what he calls the "neo-perennial philosophy", an integration of some of the views of mysticism typified by [[Aldous Huxley]]'s ''[[The Perennial Philosophy]]'' with an account of cosmic [[Evolution (disambiguation)|evolution]] akin to that of the Indian philosopher [[Sri Aurobindo]]. He rejects most of the tenets of "[[Integral Traditionalism|Perennialism]]" and the associated anti-evolutionary view of history as a regression from past ages or [[yuga]]s.<ref>"I have not identified myself with the perennial philosophy in over fifteen years ... Many of the enduring perennial philosophers—such as [[Nagarjuna]]—were already using postmetaphysical methods, which is why their insights are still quite valid. But the vast majority of perennial philosophers were caught in metaphysical, not critical, thought, which is why I reject their methods almost entirely, and accept their conclusions only to the extent they can be reconstructed"[http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/misc/habermas/index.cfm/]</ref>. Instead, he embraces a more traditionally [[Western world|Western]] notion of the [[great chain of being]]. As in the work of [[Jean Gebser]], this great chain (or "nest") is ever-present while "relatively" unfolding throughout this material manifestation, although to Wilber "...the "Great Nest" is actually just a vast morphogenetic field of potentials"...". In agreement with Mahayana Buddhism, he believes that reality is ultimately a [[nondual]] union of [[Sunyata|emptiness]] and [[form]], with form being innately subject to development over time. Wilber's writings are ultimately attempts to describe how he conceives that form undergoes change, and how he believes sentient beings in the world of form participate in this change until they finally realize their true identity as emptiness.
One of Wilber's main interests is in mapping what he calls the "neo-perennial philosophy", an integration of some of the views of mysticism typified by [[Aldous Huxley]]'s ''[[The Perennial Philosophy]]'' with an account of cosmic [[Evolution (disambiguation)|evolution]] akin to that of the Indian philosopher [[Sri Aurobindo]]. He rejects most of the tenets of "[[Integral Traditionalism|Perennialism]]" and the associated anti-evolutionary view of history as a regression from past ages or [[yuga]]s."I have not identified myself with the perennial philosophy in over fifteen years ... Many of the enduring perennial philosophers—such as [[Nagarjuna]]—were already using postmetaphysical methods, which is why their insights are still quite valid. But the vast majority of perennial philosophers were caught in metaphysical, not critical, thought, which is why I reject their methods almost entirely, and accept their conclusions only to the extent they can be reconstructed"[http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/misc/habermas/index.cfm/]. Instead, he embraces a more traditionally [[Western world|Western]] notion of the [[great chain of being]]. As in the work of [[Jean Gebser]], this great chain (or "nest") is ever-present while "relatively" unfolding throughout this material manifestation, although to Wilber "...the "Great Nest" is actually just a vast morphogenetic field of potentials"...". In agreement with Mahayana Buddhism, he believes that reality is ultimately a [[nondual]] union of [[Sunyata|emptiness]] and [[form]], with form being innately subject to development over time. Wilber's writings are ultimately attempts to describe how he conceives that form undergoes change, and how he believes sentient beings in the world of form participate in this change until they finally realize their true identity as emptiness.
Wilber argues for the value of mystical realization and in opposition to [[metaphysical naturalism]]:
Wilber argues for the value of mystical realization and in opposition to [[metaphysical naturalism]]:
"Are the mystics and sages insane? Because they all tell variations on the same story, don't they? The story of awakening one morning and discovering you are one with the All, in a timeless and eternal and infinite fashion. Yes, maybe they are crazy, these divine fools. Maybe they are mumbling idiots in the face of the Abyss. Maybe they need a nice, understanding therapist. Yes, I'm sure that would help. But then, I wonder. Maybe the evolutionary sequence really is from matter to body to mind to soul to spirit, each transcending and including, each with a greater depth and greater consciousness and wider embrace. And in the highest reaches of evolution, maybe, just maybe, an individual's consciousness does indeed touch infinity—a total embrace of the entire Kosmos—a Kosmic consciousness that is Spirit awakened to its own true nature. It's at least plausible. And tell me: is that story, sung by mystics and sages the world over, any crazier than the scientific materialism story, which is that the entire sequence is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying absolutely nothing? Listen very carefully: just which of those two stories actually sounds totally insane?" |Ken Wilber|A Brief History of Everything|42-3
===Wilber's holism===
===Wilber's holism===