Very fair and balanced response to Erik Haines. I still find it amazing that so many people who call themselves "Integralist" don't seem to understand that Divine Realization is truly at the heart of Integral Philosophy, as you've pointed out, and instead focus on the developmental levels or which quadrant some activity falls in. Thank you for the reminder of the real Ken Wilber focus and priority.
Thank you Brad. Your critique in ‘ In God’s Company ‘ was probably as close as I’ll get to understanding Ken Wilbur. My initial interest was because of my association with the Adidam Community. I’ve always read heavily,
especially in the fields of philosophy and the Eastern Religions. But reading Wilber or at least his earlier books was to tedious and not enjoyable.
Which is one reason I enjoyed and appreciated In God’s Company. Your writing style is much easier for me to read.
Thanks, Mike—that is part of my goal: to write “bridge books”—that’s one reason Wilber asked me to come work with him; problem was (if it’s a problem or just karma), it’s taken much longer than either he or I expected! Please keep reading 🙏
Thanks Erik, keep up the good work 👍 There is a difference between Waking Up and Awakening which later Wilber conflated—as my book explains—so I try to use the opportunity to highlight when he “used to sell satori, now soap [referring to an AQAL-based advertising campaign]” (One Taste). Keep on rockin in the free world!
Insightful: “One can re-enchant the universe and still remain bound, entangled in suffering” - and - “Integral is not the destination. It is a framework pointing toward enlightenment.”
Wilber adapts Aurobindo’s insight while avoiding his metaphysically assertive “supramental destiny.” What Wilber retains is the vision of Spirit as both Being and Becoming—descending into form and awakening through it. Yet Wilber’s post-metaphysics, for all its philosophical brilliance, still tends to privilege the Arc of Becoming.
Don, giving me a page # is always a good idea but it’s actually p. 73, not 13. And as I suspected, it’s not something I would have said but it’s in reference to Aurobindo, so please try to be accurate if you expect a decent response (instead of dangling a phrase out of context—thanks).
Aurobindo’s “supramental destiny” posits a teleological evolution culminating in the manifestation of Supermind and the divinization of earthly life, whereas Wilber reframes this as directional but non-deterministic development. Meta-Perennial Philosophy further clarifies that such evolutionary processes cannot produce the nondual realization of Being, which somewhat clarifies what Aurobindo and Wilber cloaked with their emphasis on evolutionary development (as the chapter was addressing). Thanks for reading.
Very fair and balanced response to Erik Haines. I still find it amazing that so many people who call themselves "Integralist" don't seem to understand that Divine Realization is truly at the heart of Integral Philosophy, as you've pointed out, and instead focus on the developmental levels or which quadrant some activity falls in. Thank you for the reminder of the real Ken Wilber focus and priority.
Congrats Brad on your response to Erik in Substack and on your beautiful new book! Can’t wait to explore it.
Thank you Brad. Your critique in ‘ In God’s Company ‘ was probably as close as I’ll get to understanding Ken Wilbur. My initial interest was because of my association with the Adidam Community. I’ve always read heavily,
especially in the fields of philosophy and the Eastern Religions. But reading Wilber or at least his earlier books was to tedious and not enjoyable.
Which is one reason I enjoyed and appreciated In God’s Company. Your writing style is much easier for me to read.
🪷
Thanks, Mike—that is part of my goal: to write “bridge books”—that’s one reason Wilber asked me to come work with him; problem was (if it’s a problem or just karma), it’s taken much longer than either he or I expected! Please keep reading 🙏
Rock on Brad! Thanks for the kind words too. That said, I don't lead with Wilber's waking-up path, but do include it. Here is another brief post that might be interest on that topic: https://www.erikhaines.org/p/towards-an-integral-approach-to-recovery
Thanks Erik, keep up the good work 👍 There is a difference between Waking Up and Awakening which later Wilber conflated—as my book explains—so I try to use the opportunity to highlight when he “used to sell satori, now soap [referring to an AQAL-based advertising campaign]” (One Taste). Keep on rockin in the free world!
Insightful: “One can re-enchant the universe and still remain bound, entangled in suffering” - and - “Integral is not the destination. It is a framework pointing toward enlightenment.”
I wonder if you could say a bit more about what "metaphysically assertive supramental destiny" refers to?
What? Not in my essay
Don, I don't see it in my book, nor is it a phrase I would tend to use.
Do I have the wrong book??
This is from page 13:
Wilber adapts Aurobindo’s insight while avoiding his metaphysically assertive “supramental destiny.” What Wilber retains is the vision of Spirit as both Being and Becoming—descending into form and awakening through it. Yet Wilber’s post-metaphysics, for all its philosophical brilliance, still tends to privilege the Arc of Becoming.
Don, giving me a page # is always a good idea but it’s actually p. 73, not 13. And as I suspected, it’s not something I would have said but it’s in reference to Aurobindo, so please try to be accurate if you expect a decent response (instead of dangling a phrase out of context—thanks).
Aurobindo’s “supramental destiny” posits a teleological evolution culminating in the manifestation of Supermind and the divinization of earthly life, whereas Wilber reframes this as directional but non-deterministic development. Meta-Perennial Philosophy further clarifies that such evolutionary processes cannot produce the nondual realization of Being, which somewhat clarifies what Aurobindo and Wilber cloaked with their emphasis on evolutionary development (as the chapter was addressing). Thanks for reading.