At present I am dealing with Holophysics 1. This deals with the horizontal (exterior-interior) polarities of HL1 (the circular level or subtle realm).

As each stage has its own unique holophysical significance I am treating each one individually. The present posting relates to mirror psychological interpretations of quantum mechanics.
 

We move now on to the second conop stage of HL1 dealing directly with the negative (interior) aspect of understanding.

The way of experiencing these stages can of course vary considerably. In what follows I am following a pattern where complementary structures are strongly differentiated. This will be especially suitable in terms of identifying the scientific implications of each stage).

Once more I will outline briefly this stage in terms of five typical phases.
 

FIVE PHASES
 

Phase 1

The first phase involves a new and deep existential crisis. One’s whole world seems to fall apart while one feels powerless to do anything to help oneself.

During the first conop stage of HL1, there is an outpouring of pure spiritual illumination that ultimately leads to a subtle form of attachment where one becomes too rigidly attached to phenomena (as representing archetypal symbols ).

Thus a new form of mirror understanding is required to wean one off this attachment.

This is referred to by St. John of the Cross as the "passive night of the senses". As the attachment by its very nature is indirect (rooted in the intuitive unconscious) there is very little that one can actively achieve and must simply surrender to one's fate.

As the purer form of illumination shines internally it sharply highlights ego imperfections so that one feels wretched and miserable with all hell seemingly breaking loose.

Indeed one typically will suffer a great deal of anxiety and a marked tendency towards psychosomatic illness.

Indeed a temporary nervous breakdown may well occur. Though this stage in fact represents a purer form of illumination it initially appears as its opposite and one becomes especially vulnerable to faults and weaknesses.

Thus we have a sudden change from what appeared as a transpersonal stage (trans) to what now appears as prepersonal (pre). This in fact reflects the fact that there is dynamic complementarity as between "higher" and "lower" stages. So HL1 is complementary with LL1. Thus as one moves "higher" in a transpersonal sense one also moves "lower" in a prepersonal sense. Putting it in Jungian terms one’s shadow - reflecting repressed features of development at LL1 - is now greatly exposed.

It is this sudden reversal in experience that initially causes such great distress. This problem is not fully resolved until one accepts that trans and pre are dynamically complementary. Thus the "higher" one goes in transpersonal, the "lower" one must equally go in prepersonal terms in intense exposure to one's deepest shadow.
 

Phase 2

The second phase involves a new intimate form of translation. One now experiences the existential dilemma first hand. As the scaffolding of old belief systems and conventions collapse, one feels truly alone and greatly vulnerable. Paradoxically in the ruins one begins to discover a new form of intimate meaning . With the discarding of second hand truth one can decide directly from experience what has meaning for the personal self. Each decision though seemingly unimportant from an external perspective now takes on a special significance.

This deeply existential experience of reality has important implications for quantum mechanics.

What it involves is simply this. The existential decision reflects a truly dynamic event where opposite poles i.e. external situation and internal attitude interact. In this dynamic sense every decision is truly relative. Therefore no absolute objective standard can determine moral decisions. Taking responsibility for one’s actions inevitably means uncertainty in relation to everything one chooses.

The clear realisation of this fact is the existential dilemma. My decisions are always unique for me personally. There is nothing or no one who can relieve me from the responsibility for my actions. My choices are always exercised in the face of doubt and uncertainty.

The very willingness to embrace this situation leads to the authentic exercise of faith.

Thus whereas institutional religion tends to promote "faith" as conformity to objectively defined moral codes and rules of behaviour, the existential position is quite different. The actual phenomenal circumstances of moral decisions are necessarily relative. What is absolute is the authentic exercise of faith in the simple desire for ultimate meaning (when faced with non-meaning).

So we have here at a micro level the counterpart to the complementarity of opposites at the previous macro level. In the former case one started with illumination (intuition) which had a reduced translation – in rational terms – as the complementarity of positive and negative poles. This complemenarity enables us to obtain mirror psychological connections to macro physical relationships (e.g. Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity).

However here it works in reverse. One starts with the uncertainty of the existential decision that - again - is expressed in terms of positive and negative poles. In other words every dynamic event involves an objective (exterior) and subjective (interior) attitude aspect (which necessarily are separated to some degree). Thus the very taking of a decision represents the attempt to transcend such limited circumstances - through faith - in the affirmation of the absolute spiritual light.

So in the earlier stage we started with the light (which was then reduced through intellectual translation). Here we start with the reduced existential event that is then transformed with reference to the unseen light (i.e. faith).

We will see shortly that the existential decision fundamentally mirrors quantum mechanical reality.

In both cases the dynamic nature of the event combines complementary poles and is not directly knowable. Likewise until a decision is taken the outcome is uncertain. Equally the static investigation of the event splits into an objective phenomenal aspect (that is observed) and a subjective aspect (the observer).
 

Phase 3

The third phase represents the gradual movement towards acceptance of this new underworld.

Though still living in the dark and restricted in many ways one now achieves greater acceptance of the situation. Also there is a deepening in spiritual focus and contemplative ability. One now realises that this stage is authentically transpersonal (trans). Indeed even though one was in the light in the previous stage, one was subject there to much pride and delusion. So one now sees this former stage as prepresonal (pre) This highlights experientially the dynamic relativity of "pre" and "trans" notions.
 

Phase 4

The fourth phase represents further adaptation. Like someone released from a dungeon one returns - more sober for the experience - to active affairs. However one still remains largely in the dark relating more easily to suffering (than joy) in the world.

This can bring a new kind of problem. One may experience a conflict as to whether to go back to a "normal" existence or to move on towards "higher" levels of spirit. If one’s quest is authentic, there can however be only one outcome.
 

Phase 5

The fifth phase represents the resolution of any lingering doubts. One is now committed to seeking even "higher" levels of realisation. This in turn paves the way for entry to the next (more deeply illuminated) stage.
 
 

Complementarity of Physical and Spiritual Light
 

So once again in terms of our present purpose – which is to demonstrate the mirror psychological equivalents of quantum mechanical relationships – we return to phase 2.

However I will start with the nature of light itself. As we know natural light is a form of electromagnetic radiation which represents just one small band on the overall spectrum.

There are many other bands (invisible to the naked eye). Indeed this analogy of electromagnetic radiation with spiritual light (consciousness) was made by Ken Wilber in his first book "The Spectrum of Consciousness". Thus there are – as with physical radiation – many other bands of spiritual radiation on the spectrum of consciousness.

However the mirror approach I am adopting would suggest that the relationship is far closer than mere analogy.

However to appreciate this we have to look at this spectrum in a different way.

We start with natural light that corresponds to the conventional modes of understanding (L0 in my terminology).

Now at the "higher" levels complementarity appears. So the "higher" are complementary with the "lower" On the one hand we have – in my account – externally focussed stages that are increasingly holistic and impersonal. On the other hand – as with the present stage - we have internally focussed stages that are intensely specific (and personal).

The holistic stages correspond very closely to "higher" radiation bands above the natural level (e.g. microwaves and radio waves) that are of increasingly longer wavelength and low frequency. It is exactly similar in spiritual terms. The light of these holistic stages greatly facilitates broad cosmic fields of enquiry and becomes intuitively refined and passive (i.e. of low frequency). Like radio waves (in physical terms), these holistic stages facilitate global type communication.

The specific stages correspond very closely to "lower" radiation bands below the natural level (e.g. X-rays and cosmic rays).

These physical bands are of increasingly shorter wavelength and high frequency. Again it is similar in spiritual terms. Indeed the interior light of our present stage is very much like a spiritual X- Ray.

When this internal light shines internally it exposes one's faults and weaknesses (that previously remained hidden). This parallels the nature of physical X-Rays that can expose internal bodily features. (Interestingly in the spiritual literature St. Dionysius refers to inner contemplation as a ray of darkness!)

So I am suggesting is that all the "higher" and lower" levels represent differing bands of radiation (both physical and spiritual) that are complementary in mirror fashion.

The "higher" levels in spiritual terms correspond to radiation of increasingly long wavelength and low frequency and provide the intuitive facility to understand reality in its broadest cosmic sense.

The lower levels correspond to radiation of increasingly shorter wavelength and high frequency and provide the intuition to penetrate inner subjective reality in profound intensive fashion.

There is one final point. In natural terms we can only see a very small band of the spectrum (corresponding to natural light). Likewise conventional understanding only provides access to a very limited band of the spiritual spectrum. It therefore entails that all these other bands of consciousness "higher" and "lower" are largely inaccessible to conventional methods of understanding.
 

Now let us deal with quantum mechanics and its mirror psychological equivalents.

The complementarity of matter arises at this level. It is well known that light displays complementary aspects as particles and waves. However this equally applies to matter. Physical particles e.g. electrons, exhibit both particle and wave aspects.

It is precisely similar in psychological terms. The very term "electron" has particle and wave aspects.

What this means in effect is that understanding of phenomena necessarily entails the dynamic relationship between perception (particle) and concept (wave). Though it is ignored in classical science perceptions have no meaning independent of their corresponding concepts. Thus in dynamic experiential terms the perception of a particular electron requires the corresponding general class of electron. Strictly speaking it represents a dynamic psychological interaction, that in static reduced terms can be explained as either a perception (particle) or concept (wave).

In quantum mechanics (Copenhagen Interpretation), the observation of a particle leads to the collapse of the wave function. This wave function does not represent actual existence but rather the probability for existence. It is only therefore by collapsing the wave function - through observation - that a particle can actually manifest itself.

We can look on psychological experience of phenomena in exact mirror fashion.

The observation of a phenomenon (e.g. an electron) - through perception - leads to the collapse of the corresponding concept of "electron" (i.e. the wave function). This concept does not represent actual existence but rather the potential for phenomenal existence. Thus it is only by collapsing the concept of "electron" - through observation - that an actual electron perception can manifest itself.

Empirical research is clearly geared to perceptions (particle observation).

Theoretical enquiry by contrast concentrates on concepts (wave observation).

Thus the behaviour at the "lower" level of physical nature LL1, whereby matter displays complementary aspects (as particles and waves) is exactly replicated at the higher psychological level HL1 where understanding (of matter) displays complementary aspects (as perceptions and concepts).

One of the most famous findings in quantum physics is the uncertainty principle. Though it is possible to measure the position or the momentum of a particle (separately), it is not possible to do both together. Furthermore this is an insoluble difficulty that is not inherently due to difficulties associated with accuracy of measurement.

Now again there is a perfect mirror psychological equivalent to this important principle.

Once again our understanding of a phenomenon involves a dynamic interaction of concept and perception. (The perception of an electron has no meaning - in dynamic terms – in abstraction from its corresponding concept).

Scientists however do attempt to measure in one-directional (static) terms (where polarities are separated).

The mirror equivalent of measuring a particle is the attempted separation of a psychological perception from its dynamic interaction with the concept, thereby obtaining fixed information (in space).

The mirror equivalent of measuring momentum is the attempt to isolate its psychological concept to obtain fixed information (in time).

Now obtaining the (separate) perception in static terms requires keeping the (corresponding) concept fixed with respect to the perception.

Likewise obtaining the (separate) concept in static terms requires keeping the (corresponding) perception fixed with respect to the concept.

Now whereas we can do both in isolation (keeping the complementary aspect fixed), we cannot do both simultaneously.

So clearly it is impossible to have simultaneous knowledge psychologically of both perception and concept.

This simply implies that understanding is inherently dynamic. Indeed it can be easily understood in practical terms. Theory (without experience) is generally not very meaningful.

However once one obtains the necessary perceptual data (through practical experience), then appreciation of the theoretical principles can be transformed.

Likewise from the alternative perspective concrete information (without an underlying theoretical framework) lacks meaning. In this case the application of general concepts can help one to see the concrete information in a new light.

In experiential terms our perceptions and concepts change continually. (We never step into the same river twice!)

Science attempts to give propositions objective truth (independent of subjective interaction). However dynamically speaking this is meaningless.

Truth cannot be divorced from experiential understanding (that continually changes).

A particularly important illustration of the uncertainty principle relates to the existential decision. Here we have the typical conflict as between an (impersonal) objective situation (cognitive) and (personal) subjective attitudes (affective).

Now in absolute terms one can resolve this moral dilemma by basing behaviour on:

Thus in existential terms the realisation of the limitations of the cognitive (moral rules) and the affective approach (subjective feelings) creates an authentic spiritual focus, where one embraces the uncertainty of each decision through faith.

The important point I am making here is that the uncertainty principle is equally a psychological (as well as physical principle). Uncertainty - in dynamic terms - is inherently rooted in the very way understanding takes place. (Einstein never grasped this fundamental point!) A full appreciation of quantum mechanical situations therefore requires incorporating the psychological with the physical interpretation. When one does this in appropriate mirror complementary fashion, paradox disappears and quantum physical behaviour becomes intuitively meaningful (in terms of the corresponding psychological understanding).

Again appreciation (psychologically) of this "higher" dynamic nature of understanding takes place at HL1 (which from an exterior perspective is LL1).

It complements the corresponding dynamic nature of physical reality at LL1.

The psychological understanding intuitively reads the corresponding physical reality. Equally the physical structure of reality suggests the corresponding mirror structure of psychological reality.

The famous hypothetical experiment of "Schrodinger's Cat" illustrates the "mysterious" nature of quantum mechanics.

This thought experiment creates a situation where there is a 50/50 chance of the cat being killed. In the original formulation the cat was inside a sealed chamber.

Schrodinger used radioactive decay in his experiment. An instrument sensitive to this radiation was triggered to flood the chamber with poisonous gas. Using the laws of probability this process could be controlled with a 50/50 chance of the cat being killed.

This experiment highlights the quantum mechanical dilemma which represents switching between two logical systems.

Two possible interpretations - there are others - can be offered in quantum mechanics to explain this experiment.

According to the Copenhagen Interpretation until the outcome is measured the cat has to be viewed as both dead and alive.

This focuses on the inherently dynamic nature of reality that operates on a both/and logic. Indeed from a correct dynamic perspective everything in creation is both dead and alive.

This can be simply explained by the qualitative binary system. When the first pole is on (e.g. the interior self) the other pole is off (the exterior world). Likewise when the second pole is on (exterior world), the other pole (interior self) is off.

Thus in dynamic terms all processes are both on and off (in continual interaction). In other words everything is both dead and alive (in circular terms).

Thus the Copenhagen Interpretation affirms this inherent dynamic nature of relationship (that requires a both/and logic).

However scientific observation is based on a static interpretation of relationships that separates poles and uses an either/or logic.

Thus once the observation takes place, the cat must be either dead or alive.

However as these two interpretations operate on fundamentally different logical systems they cannot be reconciled in terms of each other. (More correctly they cannot be reconciled in solely "real" terms. However by interpreting reality in holistic "complex" terms at HL2, the difficulties can be reconciled).

Thus the common sense "real" perspective suggests that if the cat - for example - is observed as alive on opening the box, then it must have been alive right through the experiment. However this confuses dynamic interaction (where interior and exterior poles are complementary) with static observation (where they are separated).
 
 

The alternative explanation is known as "The Many-Worlds Hypothesis".

In this case once the experiment gets under way, we have a division into two distinct universes. In one of these the cat is alive; in the other the cat is dead.

Now observation can only take place with respect to one universe. So in Universe A, the observer opens the box to find the cat alive; in Universe B, another observer opens the box to find the cat dead. So both possible outcomes of the experiment are in fact actualised in separate worlds. However there can be no interaction between worlds. Thus if on opening the box I find that the cat is in fact alive in Universe A, then I can have no access to Universe B (where the cat is dead).

This explanation raises an important question regarding the nature of reality.

Because of the one-directional static bias of conventional science, we tend to think in terms of just one macro universe i.e. "the universe" (as the ultimate object).

However from a dynamic perspective this is very misleading as here "the universe" has implies dynamic interaction as between opposite poles.

Strictly speaking the universe is both one and many. Each living microcosm is a unique universe, yet interpenetrates the macrocosm (as a common universe). Thus in dynamic terms the universe must be seen - at all levels - as the interplay of whole and part (and part and whole). In other words the Universe - in dynamic terms - represents interaction of the one and the many (and the many and the one).

Now when we try and render this dynamic notion in static terms we come up with "many-worlds" - indeed an infinite number - that are considered unique and separate. Because our common sense (static) notions tell us that we live in just one world, then the other "worlds" are viewed as inaccessible to our "world".

This gives a reduced and artificial interpretation of dynamic reality.

We do in fact live in many worlds. However they ceaselessly interact with each other. This in fact is what we call the "Universe".

In relation to the Schrodinger Cat Hypothesis, the two horizontal poles of reality (that in dynamic terms are complementary) are separated as two distinct universes (only one of which we can access in observational terms).

The "many worlds view" reduces the true dynamic nature of interaction in static terms.

Thus the Copenhagen Interpretation though satisfactory in dynamic (both/and) terms cannot be directly reconciled with the static (either/or) perspective.

The many-worlds interpretation that appears satisfactory in static (either/or) terms cannot be directly reconciled with the dynamic (both/and) perspective.

This is exactly mirrored by the psychological dilemma of the HL1. One operates with two systems of logic

As described by Feynmann an electron travelling forwards in time from one place to another interacts with an energetic photon. This sends it travelling backwards in time until it meets another photon which once again reverses direction sending it forward in time. Photons (as physical light) can act therefore as time mirrors for electrons.

Now this is precisely how I explain the important switching mechanism as between horizontal poles of understanding (exterior and interior).

When one posits a phenomenon in (exterior) consciousness this causes time to move in a forward direction for the world (with respect to the self).

However (unconscious) spiritual light by definition has no polarities. Thus the interaction of the conscious phenomenon with this spiritual light causes an imbalance in experience. This introduces the corresponding negative polarity causing a reversal in direction. So now one posits the phenomenon in (interior) consciousness i.e. becomes aware of the self (with respect to the phenomenon).

Now though time for the (interior) self moves forward (with respect to the world) - in relative terms - it is moving backwards for the world (with respect to self).

So notions of forward moving time are totally suspect from a dynamic perspective. Time for the self and for the world move in opposite directions with respect to each other.

So have here a dynamic psychological interpretation of understanding that exactly mirrors the physical behaviour of the electron.

So spiritual light acts as a time mirror for the experience of phenomena. Not surprisingly when this spiritual light is strongly present one becomes keenly aware of the purely relative nature of time.

One final example relates to the famous EPR thought experiment.

As we know Einstein was greatly sceptical regarding quantum mechanics as a fundamental explanation of reality. In 1935 he devised a thought experiment (with Podolsky and Rosen) which would test the non-locality claims of quantum mechanics. In the mid 60’s John Bell found a way to express the puzzle in terms of an experiment that could in principle be carried out on a pair of photons emitted from an atom simultaneously in two directions. Comprehensive tests were indeed carried out in the 1980’s and prove beyond reasonable doubt (though debate still continues) that non-locality does rule in the quantum world. The key experiment involved measuring the polarisation of light. Without going into details the finding was that measurement in terms of one photon, automatically determined the state of the other (even when separated by a vast distance). This is what Einstein referred to as "spooky action at a distance".

Of course non-locality is the very basis of the dynamic (both/and) logic of the complementarity of opposites. Ultimately all events are connected through the present moment (in a simultaneous state where everything is equally both cause and effect). Indeed synchronicity and paranormal activity are intimately linked to this acausal principle.

There is a considerable irony in the fact that conventional science continues to be deeply sceptical regarding the status of paranormal events.

Yet its own findings – in the highly important area of quantum mechanics – tell us that this in fact is exactly the case. Photons therefore can directly communicate with each other.

Though paranormal gifts are not an essential aspect of development at HL1 they often flourish at this time.

What underlies all paranormal activity is an intuitive (rather than a rational logic). Again conventional scientific notions are misleading. We are inclined to think in terms of the self as a person and the external world as impersonal.

However in dynamic terms both "self" and "world" have both personal and impersonal aspects that ceaselessly interact. So the correct way to look on nature is as an intimate friend with whom we can share an intimate dialogue.

Not surprisingly when nature is treated in this fashion it responds in like manner.

Meaningful synchronous events are commonplace for people who are in spiritual harmony with their environment. When one truly accepts the interdependence of all events - through the spirit - meaningful and regular coincidences in experience can be expected as an automatic by-product.

In conclusion I have been demonstrating that all physical relationships at the quantum level have mirror psychological equivalents. It is the very appreciation of this complementarity that greatly facilitates appropriate intuitive understanding of this reality.
 
 
 

Mark: What is your web address with the previous information? I am intrigued by this piece, though it invokes so many concepts that have no reference for me that I have trouble understanding the details. the parts I get are stimulating and I have many thoughts and furtherings…

Mark: It is obviously based on a large base of knowledge. How can I learn the basic understandings of the terminology so I can understand enough to decide if it is worth studying in depth for my purposes. Thanks cont…

At present I am dealing with Holophysics 1. This deals with the horizontal (exterior-interior) polarities of HL1 (the circular level or subtle realm).

As each stage has its own unique holophysical significance I am treating each one individually. The present posting relates to mirror psychological interpretations in quantum mechanics.

We move now on to the second conop stage of HL1 dealing directly with the negative (interior) aspect of understanding.

The way of experiencing these stages can of course vary considerably. In what follows I am following a pattern where complementary structures are strongly differentiated. This will be especially suitable in terms of identifying the scientific implications of each stage.

Once more I will outline briefly this stage in terms of five typical phases.

The first phase involves a new and deep existential crisis. One’s whole world seems to fall apart while one feels powerless to do anything to help oneself.

During the first conop stage of HL1, there is an outpouring of pure spiritual illumination that ultimately leads to a subtle form of attachment where one becomes too rigidly attached to phenomena (as representing archetypal symbols).
 

Thus a new form of mirror understanding is required to wean one off this attachment. This is referred to by St. John of the Cross as the "passive night of the senses". As the attachment by its very nature is indirect (rooted in the intuitive unconscious) there is very little that one can actively achieve and must simply surrender to one's fate.

As the purer form of illumination shines internally it sharply highlights ego imperfections so that one feels wretched and miserable with all hell seemingly breaking loose.
 
 

Mark: The mirror effect here. The brighter the light, the more contrast in the darkeness, the darker the shadows…???
 

Indeed one typically will suffer a great deal of anxiety and a marked tendency towards psychosomatic illness. Indeed a temporary nervous breakdown may well occur.

Though this stage in fact represents a purer form of illumination it initially appears as its opposite and one becomes especially vulnerable to faults and weaknesses.
 

Thus we have a sudden change from what appeared as a transpersonal stage (trans) to what now appears as prepersonal (pre). This in fact reflects the fact that there is dynamic complementarity as between "higher" and "lower" stages. So HL1 is complementary with LL1. Thus as one moves "higher" in a transpersonal sense one also moves "lower" in a prepersonal sense. Putting it in Jungian terms one’s shadow - reflecting repressed features of development at LL1 - is now greatly exposed).

It is this sudden reversal in experience that initially causes such great distress. This problem is not fully resolved until one accepts that trans and pre are dynamically complementary. Thus the "higher" one goes in transpersonal the "lower" one must equally go in prepersonal terms in intense exposure to one's deepest shadow.
 
 

Mark: This is the key to the whole passage, is it not? Pre and trans are dynamically complimentary in that the more transformation you do, the more translation you need on deeper pre-personal levels. This essay, and the statement in the last paragraph, is a translation to provide a frame of understanding for the explorer of experience to accept the deep shadow confrontation as part of the transformative journey. YES?

The second phase involves a new intimate form of translation. One now experiences the existential dilemma first hand. As the scaffolding of old belief systems and conventions collapse, one feels truly alone and very vulnerable. Paradoxically in the ruins one begins to discover a new form of intimate meaning .

With the discarding of second hand truth one can decide directly from experience what has meaning for the personal self. Each decision though seemingly unimportant from an external perspective now takes on a special significance.
 
 

Mark: The new translation that frames the shadow work creates more "intimate meaning." Each subsequent translation takes on a "special significance" because it is framing the unframed "direct experience" of consciousness. The "second hand truth" (former translations) that are "discarded" were the previous frames of what constitutes reality. They were the rules by which I formed (framed) the "unformed" (unframed) into consistent experience. Whatever frames are chosen to create "meaning for the personal self" (or translate the experience) are creating reality.
 

Mark: The question I have is: "How do we choose the frames to use to translate the unformed experience of consciousness to formed reality?" In other words, the old Descartes dilemma: What apples do we leave in the basket? In the context of the existential dilemma, this choice of apples, frames is unconscious. The question I have asked differently is: " What unconscious processes determine the frames we will use to translate our ‘direct experience’ into something ‘personally meaningful?’"
 
 

Mark: For example, if we choose the frame of good and evil (a deeply rooted frame for most Christians) we night decide that the nature of the experience we are having is Satanic, and experience terror, fear, etc…We might also decide that Jesus is birthing us spiritually, that we are being born again, and experience joy, peace,FAITH, etc.
 
 

Mark: The frame we choose to translate is critical here. Either way, the resulting experience will be more "intimate", this we agree on.
 
 

Mark: So, once again, what unconscious process determines the frame we will use to translate our "direct experience?"
 

Mark: It seems the psychological mirror theory would suggest that the higher the level of transformation we are experiencing, the deeper into our pre-personal experiences we will tap. Therefore, it makes sense that the unconscious process we use to choose the frame to translate the "direct experience comes from the deeper Pre-personal process we have yet to face. THE FRAME WE CHOOSE COMES FROM OUR SHADOW SELF.

Mark: Further, we must choose a frame that supports our consciousness in continuing the transformation. FAITH that the process is leading somewhere is one such translation…
 
 

This deeply existential experience of reality has important implications for quantum mechanics.

What it involves is simply this. The existential decision reflects a truly dynamic event where opposite poles i.e. external situation and internal attitude interact. In this dynamic sense every decision is truly relative. Therefore no absolute objective standard can determine moral decisions. Taking responsibility for one’s actions inevitably means uncertainty in relation to everything one chooses.

The clear realization of this fact is the existential dilemma. My decisions are always unique for me personally. There is nothing or no one who can relieve me from the responsibility for my actions. My choices are always exercised in the face of doubt and uncertainty. The very willingness to embrace this situation leads to the authentic exercise of faith.

Thus whereas institutional religion tends to promote "faith" as conformity to objectively defined moral codes and rules of behaviour, the existential position is quite different. The actual phenomenal circumstances of moral decisions are necessarily relative. What is absolute is the authentic exercise of faith in the simple desire for ultimate meaning (when faced with non-meaning).

So we have here at a micro level the counterpart to the complementarity of opposites at the previous macro level.

In the former case one started with illumination (intuition) which had a reduced translation – in rational terms – as the complementarity of positive and negative poles. This complemenarity enables us to obtain mirror psychological connections to macro physical relationships (e.g. Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity).

However here it works in reverse. One starts with the uncertainty of the existential decision that - again - is expressed in terms of positive and negative poles. In other words every dynamic event involves an objective (exterior) and subjective (interior) attitude aspect (which necessarily are separated to some degree). Thus the very taking of a decision represents the attempt to transcend such limited circumstances - through faith - in the affirmation of the absolute spiritual light.
 
 

Mark: How are you defining "faith" here? Is it how I defined it earlier, namely faith that this process ox experience is leading somewhere positive?
 
 

Mark: Is the "absolute spiritual light" the Omega towards which we have "faith" we are headed?
 
 

Mark: Is faith simply the belief that the universe has some meaning, that we CAN make a decision in spite of uncertainty?
 
 

So in the earlier stage we started with the light (which was then reduced through intellectual translation). Here we start with the reduced existential event that is then transformed with reference to the unseen light (i.e. faith).

We will see shortly that the existential decision fundamentally mirrors quantum mechanical reality. In both cases the dynamic nature of the event combines complementary poles and is not directly knowable. Likewise until a decision is taken the outcome is uncertain. Equally the static investigation of the event splits into an objective phenomenal aspect (that is observed) and a subjective aspect (the observer).

The third phase represents the gradual movement towards acceptance of this new underworld.

Though still living in the dark and restricted in many ways one now achieves greater acceptance of the situation. Also there is a deepening in spiritual focus and contemplative ability. One now realises that this stage is authentically transpersonal (trans). Indeed even though one was in the light in the previous stage, one was subject there to much pride and delusion. So one now sees this former stage as prepresonal (pre) This highlights experientially the dynamic relativity of "pre" and "trans" notions.
 
 

Mark: It ALMOST sounds like your are suggesting that this process only happens once. Sort of: "I had an experience), and was proud I had it, it substantiated my ego . Now however, I am beyond ALL egoic translations and I am transcendent!"
 
 

Mark: It seems to me to be more cyclic ("though still living in the dark and restricted in many ways"). So once one has "discarded second hand truth" (a previous Decision/translation) one has an experience of the light. Then one discards THAT second hand truth with a new understanding and brighter experience of the light. And again and again.
 
 

Mark: More precisely (and more difficult to read), each "decision" or "second hand truth" (translation) we make leads to a subsequent "illumination" and "discarding." This in turn leads to a new "direct experience" complete with a "decision"(translation) of its meaning based on (framed by) faith in "absolute spiritual light" (transformation).
 
 

Mark: The part I think is so interesting about the mirror idea is that process involves ever more "intimate" translations of both Transpersonal AND Pre-personal experience.
 
 

Mark: Not accidentally, this sounds a lot like Wilber. I will TRANSLATE [God willing J } my last paragraph via Wilber Existing Decision/Second hand truth = Identification =( phase 5) Illumination and Discarding = Differentiation (phases 1 and 2) Direct experience and faith based new Decision/Translation = Integration (phases 3 and 4)
 
 

Mark: I like that you have broken the differentiation phase into two stages: The creation of new understandings (illumination), and the realization that previous translations do not work with the new understandings (discarding). This makes more sense of my understanding of the material. [p.s. Do you like how I give you credit for this…J ] The fourth phase represents further adaptation. Like someone released from a dungeon one returns - more sober for the experience - to active affairs. However one still remains largely in the dark relating more easily to suffering (than joy) in the world.

This can bring a new kind of problem. One may experience a conflict as to whether to go back to a "normal" existence or to move on towards "higher" levels of spirit. If one’s quest is authentic, there can however be only one outcome.
 
 

Mark: "if one’s quest is authentic, i.e. if one’s faith is strong enough…(hwo could one’s quest be inauthentic? That is a interesting and troubling question for me. It doesn’t fit in my world. Interesting…
 
 

The fifth phase represents the resolution of any lingering doubts. One is now committed to seeking even "higher" levels of realization. This in turn paves the way for entry to the next (more deeply illuminated) stage.

So once again in terms of our present purpose – which is to demonstrate the mirror psychological equivalents of quantum mechanical relationships – we return to phase 2.
 
 

Mark: Actually, that is YOUR present purpose, not. Perhaps I will come back to this part later..
 
 

Mark: Thanks for the thought provoking material. I look forward to your response.
 

Mark
 
 
 
 

Congratulations! You finally managed to overcome the gremlins in the system.
 
 

The address of the "Holistic Mathematics" web-site is http://iol.ie/~peter/index.html.

Basically I am using - for this post - an abbreviated account of the stage "Descent into Darkness" as outlined in "Transforming Voyage" (available at the site).

All my work is experientially based and this is an adapted account of a personal spiritual journey. The spiritual terminology largely derives from the Christian mystical tradition (with St. John of the Cross a major influence). However the intellectual translation of the stage - that is especially pertinent to the piece - is very much based on my own views.

"Transforming Voyage" would be the best introduction to my style of thinking. Holistic Mathematics emerged naturally from the translation of the spiritual journey given in this book.

A lengthy extended discussion on the nature and levels of Holistic Mathematics can be found at my site under "The Science of Integration". Holophysics 1 is simply the application of the principles of Holistic Mathematics 1 to physics.

Yes "conop" refers to concrete operational. I am borrowing Piaget's terminology (so widely used in developmental psychology). This is suitable for the logico-mathematical type of understanding especially relevant for science. However Piaget stops at what I would refer to as L0 (the rational linear level). My purpose here is to show that more refined (intuitively based) "conop" (and "formop") stages emerge at each of the "higher" spiritual levels.

At the "conop" stage of L0 (the linear level), the child learns to operate on concrete objects using standard rational (either/or) logic.

At this corresponding "conop" stage of HL1 (the circular level or subtle realm), a person operates on objects in a more intuitively refined manner where they are seen as holistic archetypal expressions of a universal order. Here one uses a dynamic paradoxical (both/and) logic establishing the (holistic) interdependence of object relationships (rather than their partial separation).

Whereas rational logic is based on the (static) separation of opposite poles, irrational (i.e. paradoxical) logic is based on the (dynamic) complementarity of these same poles.

Thus for example in terms of rational (linear) logic, a proposition is either true and false and has an absolute truth value.

However in terms of irrational (circular) logic a proposition is both true and false with a relative truth value.

All the stages of HL1 (Higher Level 1) are based on the complementarity of horizontal opposites (e.g. objective and subjective). This is the basis for holophysics 1 where every (objective) relationship in physics has a corresponding mirror (subjective) psychological interpretation.

(A major deficiency in the mystical traditions East and West - in my opinion - has been the continued failure to translate "higher" level stages precisely in appropriate intellectual manner. Holistic Mathematics was developed as a precise means of dealing with this deficiency).
 
 

You raise an interesting question Mark, regarding the reason for the outpouring of spiritual intuition at the HL1 stage. You suggest that it is the result of interior shadow healing.

Certainly - in affective psychological terms - this would be an accurate enough explanation. One should however stress equally the positive side in a growing appreciation of the enhanced potential in the relationships (of all kinds). However a full understanding also requires intellectual and spiritual interpretations.

The cognitive explanation would be in terms of the fusion of (horizontal) structures and mirror structures.

L0 culminates with the specialised development of (positive) one-directional rational structures (the very basis of conventional science). For those destined to move on to the "higher" spiritual levels, a period of profound disillusionment is required which effectively represents the undoing of these former rigid structures. This is the dynamic development of the negative direction (mirror structures). Just as the fusion of matter and anti-matter in physics generates (physical) energy, the fusion of these two (opposite) directions - in terms of rational structures - generates spiritual energy (i.e. pure intuition).

The spiritual explanation would necessarily be in terms of more direct moral experience.

It is important to recognise that the misery, wretchedness and self-hatred that temporarily occur during the transition stage have a profound spiritual origin. In Christian terms this would be seen as the contrast between the "sinful" separate ego (with its desire to maintain a restricted separate existence) and the pure light of God (where such separateness has no meaning).

Spiritual purgation is then necessary to gradually wean one from ego desire. The existential struggle is the inevitable conflict as between "lower" ego-based and "higher" spiritual desire.

Usually illumination occurs at a point of radical surrender i.e. where one decisively commits to the "higher" principle (despite the cost in human terms).

Thus though psychological interpretation of "higher" level experience is of course desirable (and necessary) there is always an extra spiritual dimension that cannot be reduced in psychological terms.

Of course getting rid of empirical self is a bit like peeling an onion. Each stage on the spiritual journey reveals a new layer. However ego desire always returns (though expressing itself in more subtle forms). Thus as experience at HL1 moves on to the intuitively refined experience of archetypal symbols ego attachment inevitably sets in through identifying spiritual meaning too rigidly with certain archetypes. Ironically religious symbols - that culturally are widely used to encapsulate spiritual meaning - can prove a special barrier leading one to identify truth narrowly in terms of a specific religious tradition.
 
 

Mark, You are perfectly right. The brighter the light the sharper the contrast and the shadows. When the spiritual light shines externally (illumination) we tend to see the light (and be blind to the shadow side of self). When the spiritual light shines strongly internally (purgation) one is initially blinded by the light (and can only see this shadow side). This dialectical character of spiritual development is brought out very well in Western mysticism. Strong illumination inevitably is followed by even stronger purgation. Light is continually followed by dark until both are indistinguishable as the dazzling darkness (i.e. plenum-void).
 
 
 
 

You are also right in attaching so much importance to the dynamic complementarity of pre and trans notions. Quite simply in dynamic terms there is no trans without corresponding pre development. Advancement in spiritual terms inevitably requires ever deeper confrontation with the "lie" of the shadow.

Again this is brought out very well in Christian ascetism. Great mystics such as Teresa of Avila laid particular emphasis on humility as the very foundation of the spiritual life. Now the very word "humility" is derived from the latin word "humilis" meaning "low". So quite clearly it is understood that "higher" spiritual progress is inseparable from "lower" knowledge of self.
 
 

You then ask a very interesting question Mark "How do we choose the frames to use to translate the unformed experience of consciousness to formed reality?"

I think that the answer to this question is that we do not choose. In a primary sense the structure is simply given in the unfolding of the (spiritual) archetypal structure of the stage.

In other words the emergent unconscious - at the higher levels - becomes increasingly spiritual expressing itself directly in a more purely intuitive form.

Now it is of course possible to give this an indirect rational interpretation (as the complementarity of polar opposites). However it is very important that the freely given intuitive aspect be not merely reduced to (secondary) rational interpretation. Though of course the phenomenal circumstances of life - in which this unfolding takes place - will differ greatly from individual to individual (and culture to culture), the primary archetypal nature of the stage will be the same universally.

I would not agree with you when you say that "the frame we choose comes from our shadow self". Rather I would say that it comes from our deeper archetypal self (that is inseparable from all that is). Of course the process of realising this true self inevitably involves confronting the (pre) shadow and integrating it with (trans) spiritual aspirations.
 
 

Again Mark you raise a fascinating question regarding the nature of faith. Yes, one fruitful way of looking it is to ask whether "this process of experience is leading somewhere positive?". But of course this very belief itself is the exercise of faith so the definition is necessarily circular. In other words we cannot really stand outside the process of faith which is a pure existential experience. I would see faith as the desire for ultimate meaning which paradoxically is best exercised when that very meaning is (apparently) absent. Thus desire for ultimate meaning presupposes ultimate meaning in the first place.

So as I say the exercise of faith in the purest sense is not based on any rational certainties but rather on existential desire expressed in the face of uncertainty.

Is the "absolute spiritual light" the Omega towards which we have "faith" we are headed? The answer is yes, but it is important to remember that this Omega is already present (and not something pertaining to the future).

The process of transformation is of course renewed at each stage. One is only able to sustain a certain degree of truth at level (appropriate to a particular stage) so the process inevitably continues. (Indeed we are still at a very early stage here with "conop 2" of HL1).

You raise another interesting point regarding the authenticity of the spiritual quest.

You know it is a very interesting question. True practioners such as St. John of the Cross believed that the reason why so few achieved their spiritual destiny, was because of unwillingness to bear the sacrifice required. The desire for ultimate meaning was invariably compromised in the pursuit of lesser more tangible goals.

I would give a slightly different explanation. Once a stable personality equilibrium has been reached, most people in life are led to translate reality from that level. In our culture this is achieved with L0 (the rational linear level) with perhaps exposure to certain aspects of "higher" levels.

However the true mystical personality types - by definition - are not able to achieve happiness in this conventional manner. (Often they will be aware of this from early childhood). In a very real sense such types are driven to the "higher" levels in an attempt to find some satisfactory level of meaning. And - like a steep mountain climb - it is a very dangerous business with no guarantee of survival.

However for those who are truly called there is no real choice. To refuse to go forward (and backward) is to perish!

In conclusion Mark, I have enjoyed responding to your very interesting remarks and questions.
 
 

Regards,

Peter
 
 

"Mark, Yes "conop" refers to concrete operational. I am borrowing Piaget's terminology (so widely used in developmental psychology). This is especially suitable for the logico-mathematical type of understanding relevant to science. However Piaget unfortunately does not go beyond - what I would refer to as - L0 (the rational linear level). My purpose here is to show that more refined (intuitively based) "conop" (and "formop") stages emerge at each of the "higher" spiritual levels. At the "conop" stage of L0 (the linear level), the child learns to operate on concrete objects using standard rational (either/or) logic.

At this corresponding "conop" stage of HL1 [higher level 1] (the circular level or subtle realm), a person operates on objects in a more intuitively refined manner where they are seen as holistic archetypal expressions of a universal order. Here one uses a dynamic paradoxical (both/and) logic establishing the (holistic) interdependence of object relationships (rather than their partial separation). Whereas rational logic is based on the (static) separation of opposite poles, irrational (i.e. paradoxical) logic is based on the (dynamic) complementarity of these same poles"
 
 

Mark: I like this, though it is different than my understanding of "rational". Also, I dislike the use of irrational here. "Paradoxical" works well, but "irrational" does not separate Pre-and Trans rational, and you are definitely talking "trans" here. Thus for example in terms of rational (linear) logic, a proposition is either true and false and has an absolute truth value. However in terms of irrational (circular) logic a proposition is both true and false with a relative truth value.
 
 

Mark: relative to what?
 
 

"All the stages of HL1 (Higher Level 1) are based on the complementarity of horizontal opposites (e.g. objective and subjective). This is the basis for holophysics 1 where every (objective) relationship in physics has a corresponding mirror (subjective) psychological interpretation. A major deficiency in the mystical traditions East and West - in my opinion - has been the continued failure to translate "higher" level stages precisely in appropriate intellectual manner. (Holistic Mathematics was developed as a means of dealing with this deficiency). "
 
 

Mark: "Appropriate intellectual manner..." meaning paradoxical logic of complementarities?
 
 

You raise an interesting question Mark, regarding the reason for the outpouring of spiritual intuition at the HL1 stage. You suggest that it is the result of interior shadow healing. Certainly - in affective psychological terms - this would be an accurate enough explanation. One should however stress equally the positive side in the growing appreciation of the enhanced potential of all relationships. However a full interpretation also requires intellectual and spiritual interpretations. The cognitive explanation would be in terms of the fusion of (horizontal) structures and mirror structures. L0 culminates with the specialised development of (positive) one-directional rational structures (the very basis of conventional science).

For those destined to move on to the "higher" spiritual levels, a period of profound disillusionment is required which effectively represents the undoing of these former rigid structures. This is the dynamic development of the negative direction (mirror structures). Just as the fusion of matter and anti-matter in physics generates (physical) energy, the fusion of these two (opposite) directions - in terms of rational structures - generates spiritual energy (i.e. pure intuition).
 
 

Mark: OK, see if I got this right. First, I create rational belief system. Then I "experience disillusionment" because I am "destined to move on to higher spiritual levels" and "undo" my rational belief system. This creates "pure intuition" or "spiritual energy" through friction

This way you have this worded [and the way I translated it] suggests that it is the regressive (pre-rational) nature of the "undoing" that causes the friction. You say "dynamic development of the NEGATIVE direction."

I would describe the "undoing" as post [not trans] rational, or post-constructuralist. I use the rules of logic to question the assumptions upon which I had built my rational belief system, thus "undoing" it. I am simply expanding my rationality. This is not the "negative direction" but extremely positive

I do not experience a "friction" here that "generates spiritual energy," rather I experience a drive for truth here, an EXPRESSION of spiritual energy. This is the same drive for truth that first led me to create rational belief systems in the first place

Sure the drive for truth is a pain in the ass in that it continuously has me looking for better answers. In this case, I lose my faith in my rational belief systems and may even experience "profound disillusionment". However, I would posit that it is the lack of a good answer (translation = congruent belief system) that causes the "friction", not the drive for truth. I am "in-between" beliefs systems. I have discarded my old beliefs as insufficient, but have not created a new understanding that encompasses enough of my experience to let me rest.

Further, it is the spiritual energy that drives me through this stage, rather than being something that is caused by this stage. If my faith is not strong enough (or my spiritual energy is not potent enough) I will grab on to (regress to) ANY ideology that makes sense of this experience rather than face it and discover the patterns that lie within it. This includes the ideology that I have gone insane and need medication. The spiritual explanation would necessarily be in terms of more direct moral experience.

I know this might be difficult, but can you define "direct moral experience." I believe we are talking about trans rational experience, but the last sentence could mean 1 million things to me.It is important to recognise that the misery, wretchedness and self-hatred that temporarily occur during the transition stage to HL1 have a profound spiritual origin. In Christian terms this would be seen as the contrast between the "sinful" separate ego (with its desire to maintain a restricted separate existence) and the pure light of God (where such separateness has no meaning).
 
 

Mark: This seems so dualistic. Yes the pain associated with this "in-between" stage of beliefs has "a profound spiritual origin." However, I believe that this pain is caused by the lack of a good interpretation of the level of spiritual experience we are having, not a comparison between enlightenment and separateness. (These two can’t be compared anyway, as they are about as far apart as logical level can get.)

I will suggest that we experience the same essential pain (though different intensities) when we can’t figure out why "daddy is being mean to mean to me" (pre-rational), how "light is both a particle and a wave" (rational), and "what is the nature of my consciousness, how can I be happy in a crazy world?" The pain is the thorn in our side that drives us to find an understanding that gives meaning to our experience. Call it fear, angst, hopelessness, " misery, wretchedness and self-hatred", "profound disillusionment" or whatever NEGATIVE name you want.

And this is where faith becomes so important. I posit that the "Dark night of the Soul" is not human consciousness realizing its limitations and separateness, it is human consciousness despairing that it will never find an answer to the question of existence. It is a lack of faith.

: When we have faith we experience frustration, not fear; anticipation, not angst; hope, not hopelessness; mission, not misery; watchfulness, not wretchedness; self-respect, not self-hatred; and profound trust, not profound disillusionment. All of the NEGATIVE interpretations of the unanswered question of existence are just that: interpretations.

"I would argue that the negative interpretations come from un healed shadow trauma. That is the mirror principle. The greater the illumination and "undoing" (differentiation) the deeper we are likely to tap into our un healed shadow self and choose a frame that creates a faithless, negative interpretation and meaning. Spiritual purgation is then necessary to gradually wean one from ego desire. The existential struggle is the inevitable conflict as between "lower" ego-based and "higher" spiritual desire."

Peter, your material is inspiring and rich for me. At the same time, I have challenges with your use of language. I believe part of the problem is that the pre/trans fallacy has been around so long without being understood, that the bulk of the metaphors and ideas we have been exposed to violate it. Then we grab the ideas’ "trans" side, and use it, not realizing that we are bringing it’s "pre" side along for the ride. You say "getting rid of empirical self". I’m unsure as to whether this is accidental or not. Getting rid of is regressive. Peeling back an onion that one has built up oneself (ego) is regressive. I move forward, then retreat. I create belief systems then undo them. This misses the wisdom in the Pre/trans idea.

It seems more useful to me to think about it as a developmental continuum via Wilber. I have no ego, I develop an ego, I transcend and include my ego. I pre-rationally create some belief systems. I test them rationally. I discover higher order rational systems that are paradoxical when put into language. I have so separation between self and other, I recognize self as distinct from other, I experience self and other as part of a greater Self.

In relation to your above statement, the "ego desire" does not return in more subtle form, it never left! It just refined what it experienced as "itself". Then when that experiential definition of "itself" became insufficient, it expanded itself again, on more subtle levels.

In Wilber terms, this is Ascent. Translation within the level, then transformation to the next level. All the while, the completely realized SELF is the play within which the characters act (ground).

(Now, it may not have fully integrated the new concept of self, so it vacillates between a self-concept with "gross" ego desires and one with "subtle" ego desires. Perhaps this is what you are talking about.) Thus as experience at HL1 moves on to the intuitively refined experience of archetypal symbols ego attachment inevitably sets in through identifying spiritual meaning too rigidly with certain archetypes i.e. the ego "attaches" to (identification) the new self-concept ("archetypes") "too rigidly" to continue in the process of SELF discovery, until the self concept no longer generates enough consistent meaning (differentiation) , and must be replaced by a new self concept which expands on the old (integration). Ironically religious symbols - that culturally are widely used to encapsulate spiritual meaning - can prove a special barrier where one identifies truth too narrowly in terms of a specific religious tradition.
 
 

Especially, concepts of what god or sin is, let alone graven images and golden idols.
 
 

"Mark, You are perfectly right. The brighter the light the sharper the contrast and the shadows. When the spiritual light shines externally (illumination) we tend to see the light (and be blind to the shadow side of self). When the spiritual light shines strongly internally (purgation) one is initially blinded by the light (and can only see this shadow side). This dialectical character of spiritual development is brought out very well in Western mysticism. Strong illumination inevitably is followed by even stronger purgation. Light is continually followed by dark until both are indistinguishable as the dazzling darkness (i.e. plenum-void)."
 
 

Mark: Or perhaps, Vision continues to realize it’s nature until it understands the darkness and lightness as parts of itself.
 
 
 
 

"You are also right in attaching so much importance to the dynamic complementarity of pre and trans notions. Quite simply in dynamic terms there is no trans without corresponding pre development. Advancement in spiritual terms inevitably requires ever deeper confrontation with the "lie" of the shadow. Again this is brought out very well in Christian ascetism. Great mystics such as Teresa of Avila laid particular emphasis on humility as the very foundation of the spiritual life. Now the very word "humility" is derived from the latin word "humilis" meaning "low". So quite clearly it is understood that "higher" spiritual progress is inseparable from "lower" knowledge of self."
 
 

One must "know" the Lowest parts of self as compliments to the highest parts of SELF? One must include them both in one’s Self definition? I think so…
 
 

"You then ask a very interesting question Mark "How do we choose the frames to use to translate the unformed experience of consciousness to formed reality?" I think that the answer to this question is that we do not choose. In a primary sense the structure is passively given in the unfolding of the (spiritual) archetypal structure of the stage. In other words the emergent unconscious - at the higher levels - becomes increasingly spiritual expressing itself directly in a more purely intuitive form."
 
 

Mark: So the frames used to interpret experience in the "in-between" state are part of the structure of spiritual development, a priori… I can accept that. At the same time I will refer you to the section I did above on faith. The logical level (primary archetypal nature) of the frames can be a priori, given. However, whether I will experience despair or anticipation is a question of faith. And THAT part comes from the mirror compliments in my unhealed shadow. If I have no significant unhealed wounds at that level of my shadow, I will choose some type of faith, if I have wounds, despair. Now it is of course possible to give this an indirect rational interpretation (as the complementarity of polar opposites). However it is very important that the freely given intuitive aspect be not merely reduced to (secondary) rational interpretation.
 
 

Sorry. I guess since it is not my "freely given intuitive aspect" but yours, I rely on rational interpretation.
 
 

"Though of course the phenomenal circumstances of life - in which this unfolding takes place - will differ greatly from individual to individual (and culture to culture), the primary archetypal nature of the stage will be the same universally. I would not agree with you when you say that "the frame we choose comes from our shadow self". Rather I would say that it comes from our deeper archetypal self (that is inseparable from all that is). Of course the process of realising this true self inevitably involves confronting the (pre) shadow and integrating it with (trans) spiritual aspirations.

Again, Mark you raise a fascinating question regarding the nature of faith. Yes, one fruitful way of looking it is to ask whether "this process of experience is leading somewhere positive?". But of course this very belief itself is the exercise of faith so the definition is necessarily circular. In other words we cannot really stand outside the process of faith which is a pure existential experience. I would see faith as the desire for ultimate meaning which paradoxically is best exercised when that very meaning is (apparently) absent. Thus desire for ultimate meaning presupposes ultimate meaning in the first place. So as I say the exercise of faith in the purest sense is not based on any rational certainties but rather on existential desire expressed in the face of uncertainty."
 
 

Mark: We have radically different experiences here. I believe that the desire for ultimate meaning is the essence of spirituality, and that faith is the belief that we can attain it. I can, and do, desire ultimate meaning, but have gone through many times when I doubted either its existence or my ability to attain it. This were not times of "faith" for me, but despair.
 
 

" Is the "absolute spiritual light" the Omega towards which we have "faith" we are headed? The answer is yes, but it is important to remember that this Omega is already present (and not something pertaining to the future). The process of transformation is of course renewed at each stage. One is only able to sustain a certain degree of truth at each stage (appropriate to that particular stage) so the process inevitably continues. (Indeed we are still at a very early stage here with "conop 2" of HL1).

You raise another interesting point regarding the authenticity of the spiritual quest. You know it is a very interesting question. True practioners such as St. John of the Cross believed that the reason why so few achieved their spiritual destiny, was due to the unwillingness to bear the sacrifice required. The desire for ultimate meaning was invariably compromised by lesser more tangible goals. I would give a slightly different explanation. Once a stable personality equilibrium has been reached, most people in life are led to translate reality from that level. In our culture this is achieved with L0 (the rational linear level) with perhaps exposure to certain aspects of "higher" levels.

However the true mystical personality types - by definition - are not able to achieve happiness in this conventional manner. (Often they will be aware of this from early childhood). In a very real sense such types are driven to the "higher" levels in an attempt to find some satisfactory level of meaning. And - like a steep mountain climb - it is a very dangerous business with no guarantee of survival. However for those who are truly called there is no real choice. To refuse to go forward (and backward) is simply to perish (in personality terms)!"
 
 

Mark: Peter, I will conclude with an inquiry into "those destined to move on to higher spiritual levels " or "mystical personalities." I don’t believe in them.
 
 

I) believe that we are all spiritual beings, seeking "ultimate meaning". [Perhaps there are those in whom the fire burns brighter, but the same fire burns in us all!] I believe that there are two reasons a person stops their spiritual development temporarily:<p>1) Experience fear or despair due to a frame without sufficient faith. At his point they will cling to an ideology which sedates them (lets them postpone asking the question of existence), or sedate themselves through drugs or other addictive behaviors.

2) Find a frame which interprets their experience sufficiently well, that they become comfortable.
 
 

In both cases, it is the same process that gets them started again: They realize that the belief systems that have gotten them to what they have now (whether good or bad) will not get them what they truly want: the attainment of ultimate meaning. Unfortunately, this is almost always through pain and despair, I believe because there are so few role models to learn from.
 
 

In conclusion Mark, I have enjoyed responding to your very interesting remarks and questions. Regards, Peter
 
 

Peter, I say without reservation, that this is also pure enjoyment for me.
 
 

All the best, Mark
 
 

Mark,

Let me first clarify my use of the word "irrational" in relation to the logic of conop at HL1.

It is important to remember that I am using this word in a precisely defined (holistic) mathematical sense.
 
 

Every symbol with a quantitative interpretation in (conventional) mathematics has a corresponding qualitative interpretation in Holistic Mathematics.

Now the logic that is customarily used (i.e. rational) is in fact the qualitative counterpart to the notion of a rational number (in conventional mathematics).

Equally I have established that the paradoxical logic that is used at the subtle level of HL1 is in fact an exact qualitative counterpart to the notion of an (algebraic) irrational number (in conventional mathematics). (The square root of 2 - which caused the Pythagoreans such consternation - is the best known (algebraic) irrational number).
 
 

The logic of all other levels (and indeed stages) can be likewise precisely translated in terms of the qualitative counterparts to number types. Indeed as I have stated many times before on this Forum, the entire spectrum of Consciousness is in fact the qualitative number system.

Now, I will be developing this mathematical notion of the "irrational" in more detail in my next posting on Holophysics. For the moment it is enough to accept that the word is not being used in its customary psychological sense. However it should be easy to see how "rational" conflicts with "irrational" logic.

In the former case a proposition is either true or false; in the latter case the same proposition is both true and false (which indeed is "irrational" in terms of a "rational" system).
 
 

Thus in terms of irrational logic a proposition is both true and false with a relative truth value.
 
 

You ask Mark "relative to what?"

Now remember we are dealing here with an inherently dynamic type of understanding.

The absolute truth is contained in the spiritual (intuitive) realisation that opposite poles are complementary (indeed ultimately identical). Thus in terms of the direct spiritual experience there is no separation of poles.
 
 

However at a rational level we can only express this relationship in terms of poles which to some degree are indeed separated. Thus to affirm the truth as applying to one pole only is a half-truth (and half-falsehood). Put another way it only has a limited relative validity.

Now the realisation of this relative validity (of the rational translation) comes through comparison with the (absolute) spiritual understanding.
 
 

Clearly when spiritual intuition is highly developed in the personality one obtains a keen appreciation of the relativity of all rational "truths".
 
 

So once again spiritual understanding is inherently bi-polar (comprising a dynamic experiential unity).

Rational understanding is uni-polar (where opposite poles are separated).

So "irrational" i.e. circular or paradoxical logic forms an essential bridge as between rational and spiritual worlds.
 
 
 
 

The appropriate intellectual manner of translating "higher" spiritual stages is in terms of the "complementarity" of opposites. At HL1 (circular level or subtle relam) this will be in terms of the horizontal opposites (exterior and interior). At HL2 (point level or causal realm)) it will be in terms of vertical opposites (quantitative and qualitative). At HL3 (null level or nondual reality) it will be in terms of diagonal opposites (actual and potential).
 
 

The corresponding "lower" levels can be equally translated in terms of confused (undifferentiated) versions of these logical systems. Thus LL3 represents the confusion of (diagonal) complementary opposites, LL2 the confusion of (vertical) complementary opposites and LL1 the confusion of (horizontal) complementary opposites.
 
 

Of course L0 (the rational linear level) represents the full separation of polar opposites.
 
 

What I the define as the radial reality involves the (refined) restoration of dual reality, in the separation of opposites (reason), operating in harmony with nondual reality (spirit), through the dynamic bridge of the complementarity of opposites (horizontal, vertical and diagonal). Once again it is very erroneous - in my opinion to refer to this dynamic interplay as simply nondual reality.

Thus radial reality in one sense transcends all levels (and stages) of the Spectrum and yet is immanent in all levels (and stages).
 
 

I can once again see Mark in your difficulty with the word "negative" that you are being confused - perhaps understandably - by my holistic mathematical use of terminology.
 
 

"OK, see if I got this right. First, I create rational belief system. Then I "experience disillusionment" because I am "destined to move on to higher spiritual levels" and "undo" my rational belief system. This creates "pure intuition" or "spiritual energy" through friction

This way you have this worded [and the way I translated it] suggests that it is the regressive (pre-rational) nature of the "undoing" that causes the friction. You say "dynamic development of the NEGATIVE direction."
 
 

Again the word "negative" here, does not necessarily carry the conventional connotations.

The essence of the problem is this. Spiritual understanding is inherently bi-polar (as the unity of opposite poles i.e. positive and negative). Rational understanding is consistently uni-polar in the affirmation of the solely positive direction of experience (e.g. the belief that time moves in a forward direction).

Rational interpretations of reality represent a considerable distortion in terms of true spiritual experience.

Moving from (one-directional) rational to spiritual understanding requires the recovery of the (hidden) negative direction (i.e. mirror direction) of experience.

This necessarily leads to the undoing of (rigid) rational translations of reality.

It is the existential realisation that reality is inherently spiritual (bi-polar) and not uni-polar that leads to this dynamic fusion (of both directions) within. Again this is generally a very painful experience necessarily involving considerable disillusionment.
 
 

Now the mirror comparison with physical reality is extremely useful. When we combine positive and negative directions (i.e. matter and anti-matter) we get physical energy. Here when we combine positive and negative directions experientially (i.e. psychic matter and psychic anti-matter) we generate spiritual energy (intuition).
 
 

"However, I would posit that it is the lack of a good answer (translation = congruent belief system) that causes the "friction", not the drive for truth. I am "in-between" beliefs systems. I have discarded my old beliefs as insufficient, but have not created a new understanding that encompasses enough of my experience to let me rest.

Further, it is the spiritual energy that drives me through this stage, rather than being something that is caused by this stage. If my faith is not strong enough (or my spiritual energy is not potent enough) I will grab on to (regress to) ANY ideology that makes sense of this experience rather than face it and discover the patterns that lie within it. This includes the ideology that I have gone insane and need medication."
 
 
 
 

Mark, I believe you are trying to separate here components that really go together.

Of course the failure of our customary manner of translating reality causes conflict. But the very reason for this is inseparable from the growing spiritual drive for truth.

Likewise while it is true that spiritual energy helps drive one through each stage, equally it is considerably developed by each stage. Spirit is always both cause and effect. It is the ultimate goal, yet also the very source from which everything starts. Like a snowball rolling down a hill its very size creates the momentum for movement yet grows considerably in the process.
 
 

"I know this might be difficult, but can you define "direct moral experience?." I believe we are talking about trans rational experience, but the last sentence could mean 1 million things to me."
 
 

Direct moral experience would relate to existential awareness of good and evil. Every moral decision represents a choice as between good and evil (in varying degrees). Sin is to willingly choose the lesser good (i.e. evil).

Now in earlier life one tends to take refuge in conventional notions of morality (as defined by family, church, education, society etc.)
 
 

However what I refer to as existential morality relates to the personal confrontation with the ego as the root of evil. God is the Supreme Good, all loving, all wise. The ego by contrast represents the false god of the self. To choose ego over God therefore is to choose sin in the most fundamental way.

The existential crisis - from a mystical viewpoint - is in the deepest sense a moral one (where one is acutely faced with the choice of good over evil).

Often on the threshold of adulthood one becomes increasingly aware that the very ambitions, goals and desires esteemed by society now in fact constitute the greatest moral dilemma in terms of one's personal spiritual journey. Conventional society even in its most civilised manifestations pays so much adoration to the false god of ego. Once one becomes keenly aware that the key barrier to authentic development is this very ego there is an agonising and painful moral choice. One can take refuge in conventional wisdom and rejoin the crowd, or sacrifice this ego (on the altar of its desires and ambitions).
 
 

There is no way of masking this moral dilemma. As I see it is the fundamental aspect of spiritual existentialism. It cannot and should not be reduced therefore to merely psychological categories.
 
 

Again - in dynamic terms - it is both transrational (in the growing realisation of one's spiritual destiny) and prerational (in increased knowledge of the "lowliness" of ego desire).
 
 

"I will suggest that we experience the same essential pain (though different intensities) when we can’t figure out why "daddy is being mean to mean to me" (pre-rational), how light is both a particle and a wave (rational), and "what is the nature of my consciousness, how can I be happy in a crazy world;" The pain is the thorn in our side that drives us to find an understanding that gives meaning to our experience."
 
 

Mark, I would have to disagree with you here. There is a profound difference as between the intimate spiritual pain (the unreformed ego confronted by the pure light of God) raising the question of ultimate salvation and the examples you give. These may indirectly lead on to this deeper type but should not be confused with it. We cannot reduce mystical type experience to merely natural categories. Certainly mystical experience has its roots in natural experience but is of a qualitatively different order.
 
 

"And this is where faith becomes so important. I posit that the "Dark night of the Soul" is not human consciousness realizing its limitations and separateness, it is human consciousness despairing that it will never find an answer to the question of existence. It is a lack of faith."

"When we have faith we experience frustration, not fear; anticipation, not angst; hope, not hopelessness; mission, not misery; watchfulness, not wretchedness; self-respect, not self-hatred; and profound trust, not profound disillusionment. All of the NEGATIVE interpretations of the unanswered question of existence are just that: interpretations."
 
 

I think Mark, we have to distinguish here as between the deep experience (which is nothing less that the operation of the pure light of God) and surface experience (where ego plays a large part). The positive aspects of faith you mention (e.g. hope, self respect, trust) would apply to the authentic deep experience. The more negative aspects e.g. misery, self-hatred, fear etc would apply to the surface experience. Yes, this could be referred to as the reflection of the unhealed shadow but is unavoidable. The essence of the existential situation is that both aspects intermingle. Gradually if the stage is successfully resolved the deep interpretation will survive as the defining characteristic of experience.
 
 

Mark you make an excellent point about the difficulty of using pre/trans terminology.

It is precisely as you say. Ken Wilber's treatment is now well known (certainly by readers of this Forum). So when Ken uses pre and trans they are sharply differentiated from each other. Thus one using Ken's approach will understand prepersonal as synonymous with "lower" level and transpersonal with "higher" level stages.

However from a dynamic perspective pre automatically includes trans and trans pre (even when not specifically emphasised). Grasping this requires adjustment to a very different manner of interpretation.
 
 

"You say "getting rid of empirical self". I’m unsure as to whether this is accidental or not. Getting rid of is regressive. Peeling back an onion that one has built up oneself (ego) is regressive. I move forward, then retreat. I create belief systems then undo them. This misses the wisdom in the Pre/trans idea."
 
 

I would not accept Mark, that this misses the wisdom of the pre/trans idea. There is a danger in looking at this circular movement forward then retreating (i.e. progression and regression) as ultimately futile. However it is this very process that enables the peeling of self to take place. This in turn frees the pure spiritual centre of being to reveal itself to a greater degree. Thus whereas it is true to say - in a certain sense - that the spirit is already present in us, the full realisation of this truth necessarily requires the journey (forwards and backwards) in relative space-time to take place.
 
 

"It seems more useful to me to think about it as a developmental continuum via Wilber. I have no ego, I develop an ego, I transcend and include my ego. I pre-rationally create some belief systems. I test them rationally. I discover higher order rational systems that are paradoxical when put into language. I have so separation between self and other, I recognize self as distinct from other, I experience self and other as part of a greater Self."
 
 

I consider Mark that this is too rational an interpretation of the spiritual process.

I must keep insisting that the essence is a mysterious spiritually intuitive dimension that cannot be reduced in rational terms. The very reason for example that "higher order rational systems are paradoxical when put into language " is because of this ultimately ineffable intuitive dimension. To try and reduce this to merely rational expression (even though paradoxical) is to reduce and misrepresent the spiritual process.

This is my major criticism of the great philosopher Hegel i.e. he ultimately reduces ineffable spiritual experience to (paradoxical) rational format. I would only accept the validity of (indirect) rational translations of a given spiritual level when accompanied by the authentic intuitive experience of that level.
 
 

"In relation to your above statement, the "ego desire" does not return in more subtle form, it never left! It just refined what it experienced as "itself". Then when that experiential definition of "itself" became insufficient, it expanded itself again, on more subtle levels."
 
 

This is fair comment. However it certainly does appear to disappear in the illuminative stages. This creates considerable self-deception in believing that one has now largely solved the ego problem. It is only when the light turn inward (and appears as dark) that one becomes once more aware of how much the ego is still alive and kicking.
 
 

"Now, it may not have fully integrated the new concept of self, so it vacillates between a self-concept with "gross" ego desires and one with "subtle" ego desires."
 
 

Mark, even subtle ego desires are incompatible with the true life of the spirit. This point is made very strongly by St. John of the Cross.

The deep mystical purgations are concerned more with subtle than gross attachments.

The "passive night of the senses" - corresponding to conop 2 (of HL1) is concerned with the erosion of subtle (i.e. archetypal) sense perceptions.

The "passive night of the spirit" which is "The Dark Night of the Soul" (corresponding to formop 2 (of HL1) is concerned additionally with the erosion of subtle rational concepts.
 
 

And this is only HL1.
 
 

HL2 (the causal realm) is concerned with the erosion of any rigid elements in "imaginary" consciousness (i.e. projections and fantasies).
 
 

HL3 (the null level) is concerned with the erosion of any phenomena (direct or indirect) as soon as they begin to arise in consciousness.
 
 

"the ego "attaches" to (identification) the new self-concept ("archetypes") "too rigidly" to continue in the process of SELF discovery, until the self concept no longer generates enough consistent meaning (differentiation) , and must be replaced by a new self concept which expands on the old (integration)".
 
 

This is fine Mark. Remember though that the new self-concept is more the absence of a self-concept (in ego terms). I would see it as the gradual movement from the narrowly defined empirical self to a more global of cosmic or universal self.
 
 

"Vision continues to realize it’s nature until it understands the darkness and lightness as parts of itself."
 
 

This is well put Mark. Perhaps the most subtle attachment is that towards spiritual light itself i.e. preferring to be in the light rather than the darkness.

Full spiritual maturity requires indifference as to the respective modes in which the light manifest itself. The darkness is then simply the light (unseen). Light equally is simply the darkness (unseen).
 
 

"The logical level (primary archetypal nature) of the frames can be a priori, given. However, whether I will experience despair or anticipation is a question of faith. And THAT part comes from the mirror compliments in my unhealed shadow. If I have no significant unhealed wounds at that level of my shadow, I will choose some type of faith, if I have wounds, despair."
 
 

Mark, I think this is a bit too black and white. It is not an either/or situation but rather both/and. Thus unhealed elements of the shadow may prompt at times feelings of despair.

However, equally true spiritual growth of the personality will inspire and increase faith.

So once again there will necessarily be an existential struggle involving both aspects.

Successful resolution of this struggle will involve a further healing of the shadow and authentic growth in faith.
 
 

"Sorry. I guess since it is not my "freely given intuitive aspect" but yours, I rely on rational interpretation."
 
 

This would seem to represent a significant difference. In the deepest sense spiritual experience is always freely given (Spirit represents total freedom). If we do not emphasise this we may remain stuck in the sophisticated machinations of ego.
 
 

"We have radically different experiences here. I believe that the desire for ultimate meaning is the essence of spirituality, and that faith is the belief that we can attain it. I can, and do, desire ultimate meaning, but have gone through many times when I doubted either its existence or my ability to attain it. This were not times of "faith" for me, but despair."
 
 

Maybe not so different Mark! I do not believe that faith can be genuine if we are not tempted frequently by its opposite. The very attempt to "hang in there" when times are extremely rough can in fact be the deepest exercise of faith. Of course I say this knowing that the outcome is never assured. We have all perhaps experienced severely testing circumstances more damaging than beneficial to our spiritual health.

We can all be stretched - given sufficiently difficult circumstances - beyond our reasonable capacity to believe and endure.
 
 

"I will conclude with an inquiry into "those destined to move on to higher spiritual levels " or "mystical personalities." I don’t believe in them".
 
 

Mark, this is a highly interesting and important question to end on.

Let me say right away that I do not look on people who experience the "higher" vertical levels of spirit as being better or worse than others.
 
 

Everyone has their own spiritual journey that is unique to them.

However it does seem to me - whatever the circumstances or difficulties - that very few are required to navigate in depth the "higher" levels of spiritual development. Most people do not depart radically from the understanding that characterises L0 (the rational linear level).

This is an area that always has fascinated me. I do believe that there is a "mystical personality type". Indeed some years ago I revised the well known Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to take account of eight missing personality types. Whereas other personality types are characterised in either/or terms i.e. extrovert v introvert; sense v intuition; thinking v feeling; perception v judgement, the essence of these missing types is a both/and logic. Because of extreme sensitivity to the shadow self, they are inherently more dynamic and unstable requiring a high level of development of their spiritual centre of personality in order to achieve integration.

Thus for example the mystical personality type - in a primary sense is neither an extrovert nor introvert but rather a centrovert. It requires a considerable degree of true simplicity to fully develop this centre of personality. However in a secondary sense such a person can be either extrovert or introvert. However is one say is a secondary introvert there will be considerable sensitivity to one's shadow extrovert side. Thus a key characteristic of such individuals is that they never are what they seem at face value. The opposite dimension is always very active in terms of the dynamics of development. This leads such people to have inherently complex personalities.

Thus the paradox of the mystical personality type is that - when integrated - they are the simplest yet most complex of all personality types.
 
 

Now having the required personality type does not of course mean that development will successfully take place. I believe that even - in terms this group - only a very small number realise their destiny. It requires an usual set of circumstances to come together before such development can occur.
 
 

"I believe that there are two reasons a person stops their spiritual development temporarily:

In the context of my own approach this is very important as Holistic Mathematics has been designed as a scientific means of interpreting "higher" level translations.

This is very interesting. I have stated on several occasions that personally I find that an integrated approach to reality cannot be provided through an extension of L0 (vision-logic). I very much need "higher" level translations to achieve this task.

However this to some extent is a function of my personality type (which is one of the missing types in the Myers-Briggs system). Even here my personality needs are not catered for. So Holistic Mathematics is a very good expression of my personality (which is a fairly equal mixture of 4 (artist) and 5 (thinker) in the Enneagram system).

Now I can accept that for others the more linear type of presentation of the process of integration provided by Ken would have considerable meaning. The kind of inconsistencies that I would find important would not necessarily pose the same obstacle in their pursuit of integration.
 
 

And of course this would apply very much to our own discussion. It is not a case of one of us being right or wrong in our opinions but rather that with differing personalities and experience we will inevitably see and interpret issues differently.

In conclusion Mark, I feel that this has been a very valuable discussion which like you I have greatly enjoyed.
 
 

Regards,
 
 

Peter