The Freedom of the Integral Yoga by August Timmermans

 

The Freedom of the Integral Yoga

By August Timmermans

 

(reprinted from Collaboration summer 2012) 

Sri Aurobindo does not belong to history; he is outside and beyond history. [He] has shown that the truth does not lie in running away from earthly life but in remaining in it, to transform it, divinise it, so that the Divine can manifest here, in this physical world. 1 – The Mother

 

Religion and yoga are not situated on the same plane of the being, and the spiritual life can exist in its purity only if it is free from all mental dogma.2 – The Mother

 

 

As the world moves forward while occasionally triggering extreme reactionary movements on its way I would never have thought that these eruptions would affect the collective of the integral yoga and the Ashram in particular. There has been the air of conservative religion if not the signs of Hindutva breezing over. One may wonder then what the true spirit is of a sadhak of the integral yoga.

 

I never thought that this groundbreaking integral yoga could be an extension of Hinduism or that it would relate to living a religious life that requires traditional worship of the gurus. The way I understand the life divine that Sri Aurobindo and the Mother have set out as the goal hardly reminds me of previous formulated philosophy let alone religion, but its process of supramentalization to get there does remind me of a laboratory of consciousness, as mentioned by the Mother in the Agenda. For me, the Hindu and Buddhist conclusions that life is illusion and suffering and the Christian belief of one life being followed by either heaven or hell, are shattered by Sri Aurobindo’s supramental vision. It not only surpasses the traditional yogas with their sole aim of liberation and the old belief systems that take the afterlife as one’s final destiny – but it bursts out of these confinements and enters into its own space, free from everything previously thought, envisioned and tried.

 

Our Yoga is not a retreading of old walks, but a spiritual adventure.3

 

*

It is not [Sri Aurobindo’s] object to develop anyone religion or to amalgamate the older religions or to found any new religion – for any of these things would lead away from his central purpose. The one aim of his Yoga is an inner self-development by which each one who follows it can in time discover the One Self in all and evolve a higher consciousness than the mental, a spiritual and supramental consciousness which will transform and divinise human nature.4

 

Having come free from my Christian religion at a young age when one Sunday I decided not to go to church anymore, it was not an easy decision to live with for some time. I found the institution a strange distraction in its belief system. Naturally, my father took my decision as his personal failing in raising me into a good Roman Catholic. I think it is due to the Dutch democratic society and its open education system that also my parents finally understood that religion cannot be forced on someone even if it is your own child. To come free in a society that is already individual-oriented was difficult enough for me, but to come free in a collective-based culture like India’s must be hard. I remember that I did not go to India specifically for its culture and traditions or to adopt a new religion, but to enter more fully into the integral yoga of Sri Aurobindo which addressed the human being and human life at large in the context of transformation and spiritual living. It did not particularly relate to race, nation, religion and culture but to the inmost soul and Atman which are free from such confinements.

 

I find it striking that Sri Aurobindo and the Mother started from other cultures, England and France, and obviously did not have the unconscious religion of Hinduism to deal with in themselves. This must have been a contributing factor that allowed them to think openly and freely about Indian religion. In the publication ‘On Himself’ Sri Aurobindo states that he built his sadhana and insights on the intrinsically profound Gita, Upanishads and Veda but proceeded in following his own spiritual experiences and insights, formed his own conclusions, and developed the integral or supramental yoga. He points to the unique goal of the supramentalization of the human being and human life, although its principle was foreseen in the Veda it was not previously pursued in the way he and the Mother had done. Maybe Sri Aurobindo was too polite to acknowledge that his vision surpassed all the fields of culture, yoga paths and religions that Hinduism covered. It also revealed entirely new insights of our existence, the evolutionary stages of the human being driven by the inmost soul that ultimately leads to a new creation, the supramental being.

 

One of the greater insights and genuine freedoms I find in the integral yoga relates to the delicate and complex process of the triple transformation: psychic, spiritual and supramental that incorporates the transformation of mind, vital and body, and the complex nature, character and psyche of each sadhak. They make for one of the integral yoga’s most unique aspects of practice – the freedom for each sadhak to realize the divine through one’s inherently personal way. Evidently, the integral yoga cannot be translated and codified into moral rules and rules of practice applied to all sadhaks.

 

Each one has his own way of doing Sadhana and his own approach to the Divine and need not trouble himself about how the others do it […].5

 

It is generally known of Sri Aurobindo’s projection of the supramental future that it is not to be built on the foundations of the past but from a new basis. The Ashram started with only a few rules given to its inmates, and Auroville started on an abandoned plot of land where being ‘above all creeds’ is one of the pronounced ideals for the Aurovilians. The true spirit of a sadhak of the integral yoga points to the effort to go beyond one’s religion and traditional culture, mental or otherwise – the stuff that normally forms and conditions our psyche and external life – with the focus on the change of consciousness that will lead one to the true being and into the spiritual life.

 

The spiritual life (adhyatma-jivana), the religious life (dharma-jivana) and the ordinary human life of which morality is a part are three quite different things and one must know which one desires and not confuse the three together. The ordinary life is that of the average human consciousness separated from its own true self and from the Divine and led by the common habits of the mind, life and body which are the laws of the Ignorance. The religious life is a movement of the same ignorant human consciousness, turning or trying to turn away from the earth towards the Divine, but as yet without knowledge and led by the dogmatic tenets and rules of some sect or creed which claims to have found the way out of the bonds of the earth-consciousness into some beatific Beyond. The religious life may be the first approach to the spiritual, but very often it is only a turning about in a round of rites, ceremonies and practices or set ideas and forms without any issue. The spiritual life, on the contrary, proceeds directly by a change of consciousness, a change from the ordinary consciousness, ignorant and separated from its true self and from God, to a greater consciousness in which one finds one’s true being and comes first into direct and living contact and then into union with the Divine. For the spiritual seeker this change of consciousness is the one thing he seeks and nothing else matters.6

 

Uniquely, the integral yoga stands free from history and religion and itself provides the sublime freedom for each sadhak to follow one’s own way to the realization of the divine, and the freedom for the collectivity to live and build a spiritual life that is not prescribed by artificial dogma but inspired by the higher consciousness that ultimately derives from the living supramental plane and that clings to nothing but the essential and abiding truth, – leading to the ultimate goal of the life divine.

 

 

 

______________

 

 

 

 

References:

 

1. The Mother, Collected Works of The

Mother, On Education, pp. 210–212.

2. Mother’s Agenda, April 29,1961, Vol. II,

p. 190 – 191.

3. Sri Aurobindo, On Himself, 1972, p. 109.

4. Sri Aurobindo Birth Centenary Library, Vol.

26, “Sri Aurobindo on Himself”, pp. 95-97.

5. Sri Aurobindo, On Himself, 1972, p. 485.

6. Sri Aurobindo, Letters on Yoga, 1970,

p. 137.

 

 

 

 

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on Tumblr

10 thoughts on “The Freedom of the Integral Yoga by August Timmermans

  1. R says:

    While I certainly agree with the author’s perspective on Sri Aurobindo inclusive spirituality vs. exclusive religiosity and think it accurate, paradoxically, I also find couched in the quotes he uses from the Mother the seeds of confusion from which the current imbroglio of auro-fundamentalism vs academic biography, sprouts:

    Here are the quotes:

    Sri Aurobindo does not belong to history; he is outside and beyond history. [He] has shown that the truth does not lie in running away from earthly life but in remaining in it, to transform it, divinise it, so that the Divine can manifest here, in this physical world”. 1 – The Mother

    “Religion and yoga are not situated on the same plane of the being, and the spiritual life can exist in its purity only if it is free from all mental dogma.2 – The Mother

    R: The above statements as read together are nothing else if not contradictory. The first quote undoes the second one that supports the argument that Sri A’s supramental yoga is not a “religion”…..

    No man who has lived has not lived a history. How is it possible that someone born into the world is outside or beyond history? The process of being born and living in the world is nothing if not historical event and process.

    Mother also believes Sri A is a transformative figure in human evolution, who came to divinize Earth, but human evolution creates human history so how can someone who transforms a historical process be outside that very process? This would be magical thinking.

    The only way that could happen is if that person was a supra-natural or mythical being (ex. an avatar). But the belief in such a supra-natural or mythical being would then be nothing if not a product of a religious belief system, with mythology as nothing if not a euphemism for a religious systems of belief in origins and eschatology.

    In the first quote (above) Mother seems to be asserting that Sri A is such a supra-natural being – and thus herself is merely asserting religious belief – while in the second quote she appears to disavow that belief by asserting Sri A is beyond historicity.

    But I don’t believe you can have it both ways, either Sri A is a historical phenomena or he is an Avatar whose yoga was part of a mythological system of transformation -one the occcurs outside history and thus human evolution-.

    I believe that this is yet another instance of the difficulties Mother had in separating Auro-religion from Auro-spirituality. And it may mostly be a languaging problem with the traditional guru english she speaks – one that is no longer co-extensive with the movement and evolution of language in the later half of the 20th century as -post war- language has not only undergone a linguistic turn but also has turned upon itself, in an effort to devour its own truth claims.- many of which had proven so catastrophic in the first half-

    In her sayings printed in English- Mother’s is translating from the French into a fin de siecle English But in a reading today it becomes obvious she is trying to assert something that cannot be accommodated by language or, more pointedly her statements appear totalizing in an era when this type language has been deconstructed and reconfigured to accommodate a post-metaphysical civic polity. When taken from her writings and especially those conversations that were so scrupulously transcribed such Statements or Sayings, when piled upon each other seem sometimes to contradict.

    That said I am less and less sure that one can separate spirituality from religion. After all spirituality refers necessarily to a metaphysical realm, to the presencing of an absent Divinity. This absence and the attempt to situate its presence in the world entails a belief system because by virtue of its absence it resides beyond events and only virtually in the world, beyond that which can be empirically demonstrated, requiring belief. A metaphysical belief system like a mythological one is nothing if not also a religious one.

    In fact, it seems to me more and more that spirituality also cannot be more than a euphemism for a certain type of religion, albeit an enlightened or inclusive one. And in this sense I agree with the authors when he writes:

    A: “The spiritual life, on the contrary, proceeds directly by a change of consciousness, a change from the ordinary consciousness, ignorant and separated from its true self and from God, to a greater consciousness in which one finds one’s true being and comes first into direct and living contact and then into union with the Divine. ”

    R: All the major figures who are usually asserted to be universal spiritual figures be they Meister Eckhardt, Rumi, Ramakrishna et al, were all embedded and lived within a particular religious tradition from which they began to derive their spiritual insights. Whatever the universal message these figure share culturally they also lived lives within of a certain religious tradition. Sri Aurobindo refers to his system as yoga because his frame of reference is the Vedanta which background the religion of the subcontinent.

    Therefore, rather than separating spirituality from religion I believe it is more accurate to speak of differing interpretations of religion, inclusive vs. exclusive, liberal vs. fundamentalist, ecuminical vs. sectarian. In fact I think Sri Aurobindo does this well when he speaks of the former qualities as belonging to “religion” while calling the later “religiosity.”

    As I see it the problem for the Auro-community is that in the statements from the Mother above she is sending a mixed message. Her guru english is easily misread today. On the one hand she is eschewing Aurobindo’s yoga as a religion yet on the other she is claiming that he is an “other worldly” figure (non- historical) or an Avatar. In fact, perhaps it was for whatever reason Sri A installed the Mother as an object of bhakti, or figure of adoration in continuing the Hindu practices of darshan and devotion within the Ashram that began his enshrinement as a religious figure.

    It is therefore not hard to understand why the current division within the Aurobindo community occurred. If Sri Aurobindo is outside history than how can one write a biography of him as a biography can only recount the of a life of a person as it unfolded within a specific historical era. But if Sri Aurobindo is really outside history than only a hagiography would serve to recount the mythic meta-time he spent of Earth.

    While my interpretations of Sri Aurobindo’s work and intention is – as the author’s – a cosmopolitan one that represents an inclusive spirituality or non-sectarian religious practice and do firmly believe that he would have abhorred the jingoist form of fundamentalist Hinduism that Shraddhalu, Alok, Kittu, Vijay Ananda, Raman, R.Y, Sri Kanth and the rest of the their ilk have made it into, I do certainly understand the seeds that were planted from which their delusion sprung.

  2. august says:

    Thanks R for your nuanced and challenging response. If I get your gist, you point to the complexity of guru language, and I agree, the questions are indeed about interpretation, conditioned interpretation and how literal an interpretation should be. Looking at the first quote on history from the context of the conversation this was taken, I understand the Mother saying that what SA represents is not a continuation of the history that came before him but a start of something new that does not relate to the past: the supramentalization of life. This also comes back further in the essay where it states that in the end SA takes a personal position above the Veda, Upanishads and Gita and establishes his own insights and own yoga. In this context I do not think the quote on history should be taken literally. Of course SA was a historical figure participating also in human history as it developed.

    I am not sure if I can agree with your referring of spirituality and mythological figures to religion. Is this not based on our traditional way of looking at these things? Are mythological figures not free from man-made religions? I think Sri Aurobindo and the Mother were quite clear about how these mythological beings represent forces or levels of consciousness. Why these beings became part of religions points to the human factor only. If you take spirituality
    as a development of consciousness that goes beyond mind, vital and body then religion does not have to be part of it and the interpretation of the Beyond will become something different than what religion does with it.

    The second quote is also a matter of interpretation regarding what we would understand by religion. I understand the Mother saying that religion – with its religious dogmas and traditional attitude towards guru and his/her message, vision and practice, – stands in the way of direct understanding and assimilation. Remember how someone brought up in a religion interprets an experience of the divine automatically in terms of his/her own religion, meaning the person is not free from his/her conditioned understanding and thus does not understand and assimilate the experience in its purity? This is the limitation of following a religion, that the believer does not understand that spiritual experience and insight can go beyond the known knowledge and its known history.

    Even when taking the Mother as an image of bhakti this does to me not automatically imply worship or a specific attitude in the traditional sense. The integral yoga is focused on the future and I think what the Mother is saying in these two specific quotes is not to confuse the IY with the past and with traditional interpretation (religion). My question is, when attaining a divine consciousness becomes a realistic experience in the future and a matter of fact for individuals, would these individuals worship the divine or want to be worshipped themselves? It looks to me that the ‘new generation’ of yogis, and divine beings if you will, will be free from the past and free from a conditioned attitude and will bring something fresh to this ever changing stage of the earth.

  3. August says:

    For me, R, the main problem I have is that your interpretation of the first 2 quotes are based on your reasoning that spirituality is not different from religion. You say:

    R: But I don’t believe you can have it both ways, either Sri A is a historical phenomena or he is an Avatar whose yoga was part of a mythological system of transformation –one [that] occurs outside history and thus human evolution-.

    A: I believe we have it both ways here with Sri Aurobindo. He is an historical figure part of human history, however not in the common sense of historical figures like Napoleon or Alexander the Great. SA was definitely part of the metaphysical world, as we know that from his second part of his life he lived in the eternal Self and was in contact with metaphysical entities receiving knowledge, information and experience, as we know from the Record of Yoga. From this we can conclude that Sri Aurobindo was part of history as well as outside of history, his influence and his teachings stand outside history.

    R: [-] I am less and less sure that one can separate spirituality from religion.

    A: I find this strange to hear. In the second quote I believe the Mother is indeed referring to the common understanding of religion and its practice, like involving a fixed text, rituals, hierarchy, and belief system. How can this be taken as the same thing as spirituality as described in the thousands of pages by Sri Aurobindo and the Mother?

  4. R says:

    A: I believe we have it both ways here with Sri Aurobindo. He is an historical figure part of human history, however not in the common sense of historical figures like Napoleon or Alexander the Great. SA was definitely part of the metaphysical world,

    R: Well that’s a difficult thing to prove since the metaphysical world has itself yet to be proven. Therefore, to take Sri A outside of history so as to situate him as a presence outside the deferral of time’s movement is just plain logocentric

    What I would certainly say is that he provides a phenomenological account of the world that pushes subjective experience toward a discovery of its interior depths that plumb its evolutionary potentiality for adventing an over(supra)mental consciousness (aka posthuman).

    Read with James, Bergson, Whitehead and others of the time it is clear how valuable his contribution is to early 20th century metaphysics but it’s become a minefield today to tread there because there are all kinds of knots and snares one can get caught up in nowadays with metaphysics – usually in a reification, like our auro-jihadi friends – whose misplaced concreteness – is threatening to others because they mistake their ideology for reality….

    nuff’ said” about metaphysics but maybe we can speak later on of transcendental empiricism,

    R: [-] I am less and less sure that one can separate spirituality from religion.

    A: I find this strange to hear. In the second quote I believe the Mother is indeed referring to the common understanding of religion and its practice, like involving a fixed text, rituals, hierarchy, and belief system. How can this be taken as the same thing as spirituality as described in the thousands of pages by Sri Aurobindo and the Mother?

    R:I say spirituality -and also mythology -are euphemisms for religion in that although they refer to qualitatively different experiences both subjectively and culturally they all refer to a mysterious presence (Being or Origins) that because it is metaphysical, is necessarily absent from the physical world we live in. Because it stands outside of history and never quite presences itself, it is an unpredictable Other, always yet to come,
    (or at least until you can demonstrate it, empirically or otherwise )

    Regards the thousands of pages he wrote in fact, that really was not the point, -in fact its become a fixed religious text to the auro fundamentalist-

    As I understand it he was in fact pointing us beyond the discourse itself toward a phenomenological practice of being in the world (sadhana) that is not merely a transformation of representation but is transformative in an entirely existential way .

  5. August says:

    R: Well that’s a difficult thing to prove since the metaphysical world has itself yet to be proven. Therefore, to take Sri A outside of history so as to situate him as a presence outside the deferral of time’s movement is just plain logocentric

    A: Your angle of a postmodernist surely stands opposite the angle yogis have who know the immanent Divine and the metaphysical world through experience. Proof would be in eating the pudding, through experiencing the metaphysical world, and as you know sadhana prepares for experience. If you want physical proof I think we have to wait until the day that the supramental becomes visible to the naked eye. To me, belief and religion are of no value for yogis or individuals coming to yoga through an inner urge or through spiritual experience. If I understand you right then your viewing of the absence of divinity in the physical world reminds me of the extracosmic view that most religions have which stands in stark contrast of Sri Aurobindo and Mother’s supramental vision.

  6. R says:

    A:To me, belief and religion are of no value for yogis or individuals coming to yoga through an inner urge or through spiritual experience.

    R: Well they (yogis) have to start somewhere dont they? Sri A has an entire chapter in SOY on faith (shraddha) aka Faith and Shakti. And in fact in some places he says not merely faith alone but blind faith is what is required for undertaking yoga.

    (Although in others places he also writes that dispensing with common sense is a fallacy of some taking up yoga; which perhaps contradicts his blind faith comment.)

    If yogis as you say know the immanent Divine through experience -well, maybe they do I am not necessarily contesting that – but, I don’t necessarily see their experience evidenced by any material instantiations in the world especially with respect to making the world a better place.

    (Look what happened to Sri A’s own Ashram infighting like cats and dogs and since all these folks claim they are practicing Integral Yoga, one can easily argue that the evidence that we have in fact does not support your assertion of the immanent experience of divinity, but rather demonstrates that in fact after the practice of integral yoga that some people become fanatical “jerks”.)

    But if one speaks of an immanent experience of Divinity why limit the experience to yogis? Doesn’t everyone have experiences of things sublime or beautiful that are incomprehensible? – and I dont mean just the experience of artist or poets –

    Perhaps you would say that everyone may have these experience now or then but that these experiences are normalized in the yogi.

    Well perhaps but again you dont have to be a postmodernist to suspect that there is little in the way of any proof that can be offered to support that assertion. (although I can accept with regards to subjective experience that proof to others maybe besides the point; that is of course if one does not claim ones own experience to be a universal one)

    A: If I understand you right then your viewing of the absence of divinity in the physical world reminds me of the extracosmic view that most religions have which stands in stark contrast of Sri Aurobindo and Mother’s supramental vision.

    R: Well maybe closer to something like negative theology but if the supramental vision is a totalizing omniscient one as you claim, than it would surely include and contain all views including extra-cosmic or otherwise -even those that seemingly contradict it- would it not?

    If not, and if it excludes or contradicts other paths/views than it is not an all encompassing integral experience but it simply is the relativization of a certain mystical event.

    Sri A writes: There is one kind of faith that is indispensable for integral yoga and that may be described as faith in God or faith in Shakti (743)

    I would argue that faith in the divine presence as well as doubt stemming from an absent divinity are not separate and in fact doubt is inseparable from faith because “doubt does not merely insinuate itself into faith but in fact constitutes faith, for faith is faith precisely in the face of doubt and uncertainty, the passion of non-knowing. ” (see link)

    To sum it up integral yoga relies on faith as much as any spiritual path and since faith is constituted by doubt I fail to see the contradiction between doubt in the face of not knowing vs. certainty in the face of knowing that is gained through an act of faith.

  7. August says:

    R: Well they (yogis) have to start somewhere dont they? Sri A has an entire chapter in SOY on faith (shraddha) aka Faith and Shakti. And in fact in some places he says not merely faith alone but blind faith is what is required for undertaking yoga.

    A: Not always. Some individuals, including myself, have spontaneously experienced the spiritual reality and did not relate it to any faith. To receive guidance from a guru and/or apply yogic discipline to come to the realization of the spiritual state is a necessity although there might be exceptions whose inner development happens by destiny.

    R: If yogis as you say know the immanent Divine through experience -well, maybe they do I am not necessarily contesting that – but, I don’t necessarily see their experience evidenced by any material instantiations in the world especially with respect to making the world a better place.

    A: Well you do not see evidence but others do. Your poise is – if I cannot see it then it does not exist- while conveniently ignoring that others see/experience it and know. In the end it is a matter of knowing not believing. Again the evidence is in the experience. And, such individuals do contribute in making the world a better place as they guide others to attain a consciousness and the realization of it that takes them out of ignorance. That is quite a change in the world and defenitily has an affect on others.

    You are right about what is happening with the fundamentalist and religious movement at the Ashram, there is no evidence that it is based on the inner experience of Divinity. Hence my essay.

    R: Doesn’t everyone have experiences of things sublime or beautiful that are incomprehensible? – and I dont mean just the experience of artist or poets –

    A: Exactly, it is not limited to yogis or exceptional people. Are you here acknowledging the existence of the immanent Divine?

    R: [-] if the supramental vision is a totalizing omniscient one as you claim, than it would surely include and contain all views including extra-cosmic or otherwise -even those that seemingly contradict it- would it not?

    A: It surely does. I was more referring to myself being more inspired by the supramental vision then by the postmodernist point of view. I believe Sri Aurobindo addresses the extracosmic point of view in the chapter on Divine and Undivine, of The Life Divine.

    R: To sum it up integral yoga relies on faith as much as any spiritual path and since faith is constituted by doubt I fail to see the contradiction between doubt in the face of not knowing vs. certainty in the face of knowing that is gained through an act of faith.

    A: Faith relates to me much more to the context of facing hardships in the yoga. I think one enters the path of yoga not so much on faith but based on an inner knowing. In yoga I think faith is required for the darker days or for stage(s) when nothing spiritual happens like in the preparatory stage. For people who believe in God through a religion faith gives them the strength to get through life.

  8. R+ says:

    A:…. Some individuals, including myself, have spontaneously experienced the spiritual reality and did not relate it to any faith. To receive guidance from a guru and/or apply yogic discipline to come to the realization of the spiritual state is a necessity although there might be exceptions whose inner development happens by destiny.

    R: Well Sri A is the one saying that faith in God or Shakti is indispensable for integral yoga so you would have to contrast your experience with what he writes but, my point is not that some people may or may not have had any particular experience including a “spiritual” one but rather, the fact that the the very act of labeling the spontaneous experience as “spiritual” is itself an act of faith, namely faith in a signifier to describe what is real.

    In this instance one has faith that the culturally or systematically determined signifier “spiritual” in fact signifies ones personal experience. The process entails one matching up ones subjective experience (signified) with its objective social definition (signifier). In this instance the signifier is spirituality. But spirituality has in fact meant many different things to many different cultures and systems of beliefs and so the process of signification as relates to spirituality is a complex one. Or should I just say the word is not the thing, the map not the territory. (I think there is a good reason that Sri A has a prohibition – or does not encourage – speaking about ones deepest subjective experience and thereby dissipating them in language)

    But that said I certainly do not question the magnitude of experience you have personally had, it was obviously profound and in fact perhaps I have had the same experience myself. But, I personally am left -especially after the Heeh’s affair- reluctant to label things as spiritual or belonging to integral yoga or not since I have seen these terms so abused -by those who claim to practice these systems – beyond any beliefs I may have had in them.

    A: Well you do not see evidence but others do. Your poise is –if I cannot see it then it does not exist- while conveniently ignoring that others see/experience it and know. In the end it is a matter of knowing not believing.

    R: I dont think I said if I dont see it it does not exists or that I did not see evidence of what is called spirituality in the world. Rather, and I know this is problematic for those who practice a system that is based specifically on the limitations of the evidence based rational mind, I am voicing the concern that for the purposes of intersubjective communication, for achieving understanding within a civitas or polity constituted by a population with a multiplicity of beliefs that intersubjective comprehension has to be anchored in a system in which truth claims can be measured by evidence.

    – this may not actually square with pomo or poco theories of competing truth claims and non-Enlightenment modes of indigenous discourses as well as competing interpretations of evidence based measurement- but the value of constructing knowledge through empirical verification is evident in the Record of Yoga as Sri A tests and deconstructs his inner experiences seeking out verifiable evidence of siddhas and parapsychological phenomena.

    But some valuations of standards of competing truths claims are needed for that matter even within a particular community such as a community of sadhaks – as evidenced in the Ashram, where conclusions are reached about text without even reading them- here too there maybe a multiplicity of competing interpretations as to what the spiritual life means. To some people waging a jihad is a spiritual cause.
    Spirituality can be some dangerous shit…

  9. August says:

    The spirituality I know is a blessing, peace, happiness and a positive and constructive outlook.

  10. R+ says:

    and who can argue with that… 😉

Leave a Reply

Anouncements


Amazon Book Links