Please Log in to Vote.

4 out of 4 members found this useful.

Integrating Freud and Buddha: 2nd Time's a Charm

Posted August 26th, 2009 by Jennifer Grove in Integral Christianity

In Reference to:

Okay. This is the 2nd time I've listened to this and I think I understand now why Integral is ignoring Emergent. I think Integral believes that Emergent is, what Ken called, "stealing truth from other people". That must be it. That's the only thing that makes sense.

When Emergent first started, some people immediately went that way with it. But not everyone did. Brian McLaren certainly didn't. I've met the man and he is transparent (and feisty) about this: any attempt on the part of The Church to colonize other people or religions is just wrong. And he begins from that line. I've interacted with people on forums where the thinking is intentional about opening the front end (future and dogma) up and leaving it open. But this is an emerging thing and there will be some people who are still confused about it and some nim-nulls are still trying to keep the lid on things theologically and eschatologically. That's the way of emergent things. But the great thing about "Emergent" is that they're not claiming to be anything else. The "Leadership" has had to fight to stay true to the actual meaning of the title like few people will ever know. I watched the verbal abuse and beatings go on for years. And no matter how much I speak up about this, Integral still doesn't respond.

I see now that my perspective is unique because of my "Unique Self". And one of the main distinctions about my Unique Self is that I see in the Dark. I always have. So when I looked at Christianity at the very begining, I wouldn't give it a "pass" until it showed it's true color to me in the dark. It has. And it has even when I stopped wanting it to. Jesus's High Level of development held me fast while I fought to hang on to some of the conveniences of low level development and He plunged me into my own Darkness so that I could no longer see Him anymore. But my Unique make-up rose to the challenge and I invented my own Shadow Work before I even knew what it was or knew about Integral. Mine is Homegrown. I understand how it works "under the hood" better than most. I see Light and Dark arising simultaneously all around me and within me.

So what's the hold-up Integral? Is there anyone who will give me an explanation for this indifference and silence that I'm looking right at? I can't not see it. It is obvious to me because of my Unique design and perspective. Does that perspective get integrated in or not?

Please Login to Add Comments
show all sub-comments
Report Abuse

Please Log in to Vote.

4 out of 4 members found this useful.

[Comment Deleted]

Posted August 26th, 2009 by admin

This comment has been deleted by the author.

3 Comments

Please Log in to Vote.

0 out of 0 members found this useful.

To emerge or not to emerge?

Posted August 28th, 2009 by Jennifer Grove in response to [Comment Deleted]

Hi, Anne.

Yeah, y'know... It's weird when he's doing something that matters and he gets caught inside the importance. It may be only for a few moments or so, but it's there. It gets personal and scary. His voice changed and he sank into the perspectives a bit too heavily. He's right, but caught for a bit nevertheless. And that's okay. I'm caught 99% of the time, he may as well be caught that last 1%. I think there's a joke about carbon offsetting in there someplace.

At the time of this interview it was still crucial for Integral to stand between the two battle lines about Marc. Even the intense position Ken took here was neutral compared to the rest. It was flamin'!! Doing that will always serve the long view, as you said - and it has indeed. Integral is now positioned to be the place for Marc to re-emerge and re-establish with safety and accountability. Delicate!

I can't tell if you are familiar with how I'm using the word "Emergent". Do you know who Brian McLaren is? Even that link is deceptive, because, as Brian sorta says, "Emergent" is not emergent. Emergent is emergent. Once you call something, something, it is no longer an emergent, but is becoming the simulacra of the emergent. The emergent itself is just in front of it - on the frothy/bleeding edge. They are quite clear that its important to not be clear otherwise they'll fall off the edge of the emergence. Notice how they don't list their leadership or don't make doctrinal statements? This is all very much the point. Just to be clear.... er, not. Oy.

It is tricky to define Christianity according to itself but yet avoid colonizing or "stealing truth". We have to say something! And indeed we are and have been.

I'm jus' sayin'!

The scientific community is still using deterministic language inherited from alchemy, astrology and magic. Of all the lines of cognitive development to still be using magical thinking, I would never have thought science would be one of the most prominent.

Please Log in to Vote.

0 out of 0 members found this useful.

[Comment Deleted]

Posted August 28th, 2009 by admin in response to To emerge or not to emerge?

This comment has been deleted by the author.

1 Comment

Please Log in to Vote.

0 out of 0 members found this useful.

Where do I start?

Posted August 28th, 2009 by Jennifer Grove in response to [Comment Deleted]

Oh, dear. This is fascinating.

Have you heard of liminal space? Here's a quote from the wiki article:

"The liminal state is characterized by ambiguity, openness, and indeterminacy. One's sense of identity dissolves to some extent, bringing about disorientation. Liminality is a period of transition where normal limits to thought, self-understanding, and behavior are relaxed - a situation which can lead to new perspectives.

People, places, or things may not complete a transition, or a transition between two states may not be fully possible. Those who remain in a state between two other states may become permanently liminal."

This describes the important aspects of an emergent in regards to "Emergent". The people who have emerged as the most articulate about this phenomenon have a strange ability to create and protect a sort of Bardo about it. They are decidedly NOT "an organization" or "members" or "making rules" or "philosophy" or "giving anyone qualities". They are merely standing guard over millions of people who found no place to stand within the Church's categories and structures - like the Buddhism practicing individual you describe - and preventing them from being squashed by the impulse to eliminate that which is outside the "pail of orthodoxy" as Hank Hanegraaf would describe it, within the Church. Hanegraaf plays the Skilled Warrior for the forces of Dogma within Evangelical Christianity and is nothing to sniff at. Like KW, his memory is superhuman and he can leap over ten-thousand "heresies" in a single bound.

Years ago, largely as a result of the Internet, but also as a result of the global shift into higher development that is spontaneously happening in all lines, individual Voices speaking out their dissatisfaction about Church Tradition and Practice began finding each other and creating a We-space. What was once the subaltern hiding in the shadows, was now finding a space to stand. But because of what was being seen and understood automatically by people at this new and higher level of development, they knew they had to do it without repeating the same mistake of it's oppressors and grasping for it's own control over others. So, this impulse to witness and protect what was happening but not establish itself as a Tradition or Institution was called "Emergent". [that's an oversimplifying short version]

Since emergent is actually a We-space, even though it denies its own familiarity with and impulses towards standardization, it can have an influence on individuals. This is passive, not active, and demonstrates KW's thoughts about how this works in the first place. It is careful to keep educating people about how to think for themselves and not keep trying to establish a standard within which to trap some and exclude others. It talks about the ideas that are coming to the front of this phenomenon, but it does not enforce these ideas within. It protects them from those without who seek to squash them.

For most Christians, this is so difficult a leap to make that the tension created is not unlike what Ghandi created when leading India to independence. Passions normally hidden within polite church discourse are rising up and flaming. Horrible things have been spoken all because people really believe Emergent is bringing the Apocalypse and they're terrified and horrified. People are showing their "true colors". What was previously interior has now been externalized as words and actions - in other words, the Shadow of Emergent has tetra-arisen along side of it.

The whole thing is fascinating and incredibly pertinant to Integral's stated intentions about spirituality in general and Christianity in particular, and that is why I do not understand why Integral is ignoring it. WIE magazine printed a tiny blurb about it a few years back describing it as a "publishing gimick". I nearly died of exasperation.

For just $14.95 a month, YOU TOO can offset your Karma Footprint by becoming a Member of Integral Life!

[has that already been done?]

Please Login to Add Comments
Report Abuse

Please Log in to Vote.

3 out of 3 members found this useful.

two birds sat on a tree

Posted August 27th, 2009 by steven martini

Hello Jennifer-

This is a very interesting interview with Ken. Seeing Judiasm through the integral lens cleared a few shadow points for me. Thanks for bringing this conversation to light.

It sounds to me like he's saying Freud nails the lower chakras while Buddha hammers the upper.

some thoughts:

at around 7:50 he talks about how Integral only tries to acknowledge "you're right when you're within you're own field, but when you start making claims outside your field you're wrong"

this makes me think of Galileo - who was not really imprisoned because of his astronomical discoveries, but because of his re-write and re-interpretation of the Bible....

Has anyone on here ever read Galileo's Bible? I have not - but would love to. I wonder how different it is - and does it prove to be more or less Integral...? I'm guessing more, which re-enforces my suspicion at how loosely we must take this...

15:15 "two birds sat on a tree and pecked each other... that is string theory"

LoL this is hilarious...!

22:00

Wow. I had no idea this kind of scandal happened with Gafni. I don't know the details - the sex shadow is a big one - but I certainly forgave President Clinton - good thing Ken did ethically - and somehow it feels like focusing on Marc is a slight wag the dog by Ken deflecting the question away from Cohen lol

I like how at the end we get a sense of the higher and lower levels as light and dark without being dualistic. I wonder what was the reaction to this article in Isreal. Did anyone ever translate the Hebrew article and responses?

∞ 1 2 3 4 3 2 1 ∞

Please Log in to Vote.

0 out of 0 members found this useful.

Nice romp!

Posted August 28th, 2009 by Jennifer Grove in response to two birds sat on a tree

"...as long as they are staying in their own discipline, with things that they actually know, with the injunctions and paradigms that they already have that work. When they step outside of their field, we don't listen to them as much. We think they often make mistakes."

The problem with that is that paradigms are expanding and shifting within those disciplines and then you have the new wine in the old wineskin problem. SHPLURT!! On the foaming/bleeding edge of any emergent, there will be confusion and mistakes. So sue them. Meanwhile they're learning alot. So, yeah.

Galileo's Bible sounds like it would be a thrill. I have most of the current translations. I would love to collect the ancient ones as well. What's-his-name was just talking about The Red Letter Bible last Saturday on The Great Integral Awakening broadcast. Who'sit...? Bother! But that's a good one too. Very concise.

Why is he saying that Judaism has to include the sciences if he doesn't want them to stray outside their disciplines? But if they try to, then they're stealing truth. Huh???

"We just don't listen to that. Because I just don't believe that God is the type of intelligence that has a Chosen People."

That was not very skillfully said. But, then she said she liked that because for journalism, provocation is good. "We can't include the exclusivity claims" was much better because that is a logic problem. But, that's my Green meanie showing itself. Don't like the elitism smell on that one. But I did have to laugh at the "Jewish obnoxiousness" comment. That was so far over the top that you just have to... uh, ... laugh. "Fuckin' A, man!"

I've commented before on Ken's non-stance on Andrew Cohen. On Twitter, I've even given it a hashtag. The #AC_debacle. I think there's a reason, and I think it's important. But I don't like it. For years, I've been told that "Inquiring minds want to know!" but I'm starting to rethink that. Not everything is our business because the charge that mass media creates reinforces the polarity, which in some cases can be downright dangerous. Sometimes he uses polarity, like in Marc's case, and in the case of Jewish Hermeneutics. But the situation with Andrew may be different. Public outcry isn't always the best way to get things done. I'm putting that hot-potato down now.

Like I said to Anne, I think Ken became somewhat caught in the importance of this conversation, and lost his edge a bit. He's a sweet man, in an impossible and absurd position.

How fun that you didn't know about what happened to Marc! I think that's wonderful. That says alot. Well, welcome to Integral Recovery! Integral has the highest potential for recovery, I believe, because it goes so much deeper than anything else. I've heard it said that Hope is just another form of Fear. And it may be true. It's terrifying having something wrong with you - or even just having 9/10 of the world think there's something wrong with you - and there's no known cure. It's hard to stay present in that kind of place all the time. So, I'm not ashamed of Hoping that there is recovery and integration for even the darkest of Shadows. Like Marc has said in his Dragon series - which I have printed out: the best light is hidden in the darkness. Bless him!

Please Login to Add Comments
Report Abuse

User login

Quick Links

The Archives

Please Log in to Vote.

Integrating Freud and Buddha: 2nd Time's a Charm

Please Log in to Vote.

[Comment Deleted]

Please Log in to Vote.

To emerge or not to emerge?

Please Log in to Vote.

[Comment Deleted]

Please Log in to Vote.

Where do I start?

Please Log in to Vote.

two birds sat on a tree

Please Log in to Vote.

Nice romp!