A key aspect of my holistic mathematical approach at this time (early 90's) was the manner in which the major levels of each band was defined with respect to the 3 sets of dimensions that have been already outlined.
In general terms, the "lower" band (i.e. Band 1) relates to the gradual differentiation of these three sets, starting from an initial state where total confusion is in evidence.
So with the commencement of development, all three sets are greatly confused - initially with respect to the embryonic foetus - in the life of the baby infant. Because no meaningful differentiation has yet taken place, meaningful integration can likewise not exist.
The first task then is the gradual differentiation of the fundamental diagonal polarity set of form and emptiness. So eventually with the culmination of Level 3 (which represents the lowest level), form can be distinguished from emptiness. What this entails is that through sensori-motor activity, the infant gradually learns to distinguish the self from the phenomenal world, that is now bounded by more permanent notions of form. Initially the recognition of form is so fleeting that it cannot be clearly distinguished from the (empty) immediate present moment!
While ongoing differentiation with respect to the diagonal polarities necessarily continues, the next task is the differentiation of the vertical whole/part polarities. Prior to this, the infant engages in magical thinking, where holistic (unconscious) reality remains greatly confused with specific (conscious) symbols. However with the culmination of Level 2, substantial progress has been made in the separation of the emotional self from the environment, thereby eroding the magical nature of experience.
The final major task of the "lower" band is then to achieve substantial differentiation with respect to the remaining horizontal polarity set of external and internal.
This then leads to the growing ability to successfully abstract (external) objective events from the (internal) self.
So the main emphasis in earliest development is on the successful differentiation of each of the 3 main polarity sets. Though a certain amount of supporting integration is also necessary, this remains secondary to successful differentiation at this time.
The next band - which I refer to as Band 2 - then relates to growing specialisation with respect to the differentiated development that has already occured.
The first concrete level relates directly to specialisation with respect to the horizontal polarities in the generation of detached objective data in experience.
The second formal level then relates to the growing specialisation with respect to "whole" concepts and the ability to formulate abstract theories.
The final vision level then relates to the two-way interplay of both previous levels, in an increasingly creative manner that implicitly requires the generation of substantial intuition.
However though once again a certain degree of supporting integration also necessarily takes place, in our Western culture this tends to be of a somewhat reduced nature, designed to accommodate the primary emphasis on successful differentiation with respect to experience.
If this is to be properly addressed, a dramatic change in emphasis is required in development with substantial erosion of dualistic activity (expressive of differentiation) required to accommodate true nondual integration).
This relates to the "higher" band (Band 3) in my approach.
The first "higher" level (Level 1) then relates to the paradoxical circular appreciation of the nature of external and internal polarities paving the way for a purer nondual spiritual awareness at this level.
The second "higher" level (Level 2) then relates to the additional paradoxical interplay as to the nature of whole and part polarities that are "real" and "imaginary" with respect to each other.
In turn this leads to substantial recognition of the complementary vertical links that relate Band 1 with Band 3 (especially with respect to Level 2 in each case). Thus the mature integral experience of the "higher" is necessarily with respect to the remaining confused experience of the corresponding "lower" level (with ultimately pure nondual appreciation "higher and "lower" attaining a merely relative secondary meaning).
Finally the third "higher" level (Level 3) leads to to most refined paradoxical interplay as between the form and emptiness polarities. This in turn leads to the greatest degree of interaction both within and between levels with respect to the "lower" band (Band 1) and the corresponding "higher" Band (Band 3).
Thus, though Level 3 - both "higher and "lower" - maintain a certain discrete meaning (as restricted to just one level in each case), in truth their true nature is of a highly dynamic continuous level linking all "higher" and "lower" levels!.
Thus the baby infant in a sense at "lower" Level 3 accesses all levels on the spectrum (in a highly confused manner).
Likewise the advanced contemplative - with certain important limitations - at "higher" Level 3 accesses all levels on the spectrum (in a corresponding mature manner). And both of these Bands remain intimately connected with each other throughout development!
However the major weakness of my approach at that time - which I was only later to clearly realise - is that the middle levels (associated with specialised linear type understanding) became significantly bypassed. What I was really describing was the integration of Bands 1 with Band 3. However, though I indeed recognised the importance of Band 2 (with respect to the specialised differentiation of activity), I was not yet able to show how this Band could then be successfully integrated with both "higher" and "lower" bands.
At that time, I mistakenly believed in a "happy ever after" scenario, whereas the full radial structures, where both dual and nondual would successfully interpenetrate with each other, would now quickly occur in development.
However I was to slowly realise that in balanced development, equal attention needs to be given to both the "ascent" and the "descent". So I had only really yet outlined the "ascent" with respect to development, with the tricky task of successful "descent" to be yet negotiated.
However despite this, the subsequent years have only deepened my conviction in the value of the holistic mathematical approach to development.
My understanding of how it operates has indeed become more refined. However the basic insights that I formulated in the early 90's were certainly all on the right track.
In general terms, the "lower" band (i.e. Band 1) relates to the gradual differentiation of these three sets, starting from an initial state where total confusion is in evidence.
So with the commencement of development, all three sets are greatly confused - initially with respect to the embryonic foetus - in the life of the baby infant. Because no meaningful differentiation has yet taken place, meaningful integration can likewise not exist.
The first task then is the gradual differentiation of the fundamental diagonal polarity set of form and emptiness. So eventually with the culmination of Level 3 (which represents the lowest level), form can be distinguished from emptiness. What this entails is that through sensori-motor activity, the infant gradually learns to distinguish the self from the phenomenal world, that is now bounded by more permanent notions of form. Initially the recognition of form is so fleeting that it cannot be clearly distinguished from the (empty) immediate present moment!
While ongoing differentiation with respect to the diagonal polarities necessarily continues, the next task is the differentiation of the vertical whole/part polarities. Prior to this, the infant engages in magical thinking, where holistic (unconscious) reality remains greatly confused with specific (conscious) symbols. However with the culmination of Level 2, substantial progress has been made in the separation of the emotional self from the environment, thereby eroding the magical nature of experience.
The final major task of the "lower" band is then to achieve substantial differentiation with respect to the remaining horizontal polarity set of external and internal.
This then leads to the growing ability to successfully abstract (external) objective events from the (internal) self.
So the main emphasis in earliest development is on the successful differentiation of each of the 3 main polarity sets. Though a certain amount of supporting integration is also necessary, this remains secondary to successful differentiation at this time.
The next band - which I refer to as Band 2 - then relates to growing specialisation with respect to the differentiated development that has already occured.
The first concrete level relates directly to specialisation with respect to the horizontal polarities in the generation of detached objective data in experience.
The second formal level then relates to the growing specialisation with respect to "whole" concepts and the ability to formulate abstract theories.
The final vision level then relates to the two-way interplay of both previous levels, in an increasingly creative manner that implicitly requires the generation of substantial intuition.
However though once again a certain degree of supporting integration also necessarily takes place, in our Western culture this tends to be of a somewhat reduced nature, designed to accommodate the primary emphasis on successful differentiation with respect to experience.
If this is to be properly addressed, a dramatic change in emphasis is required in development with substantial erosion of dualistic activity (expressive of differentiation) required to accommodate true nondual integration).
This relates to the "higher" band (Band 3) in my approach.
The first "higher" level (Level 1) then relates to the paradoxical circular appreciation of the nature of external and internal polarities paving the way for a purer nondual spiritual awareness at this level.
The second "higher" level (Level 2) then relates to the additional paradoxical interplay as to the nature of whole and part polarities that are "real" and "imaginary" with respect to each other.
In turn this leads to substantial recognition of the complementary vertical links that relate Band 1 with Band 3 (especially with respect to Level 2 in each case). Thus the mature integral experience of the "higher" is necessarily with respect to the remaining confused experience of the corresponding "lower" level (with ultimately pure nondual appreciation "higher and "lower" attaining a merely relative secondary meaning).
Finally the third "higher" level (Level 3) leads to to most refined paradoxical interplay as between the form and emptiness polarities. This in turn leads to the greatest degree of interaction both within and between levels with respect to the "lower" band (Band 1) and the corresponding "higher" Band (Band 3).
Thus, though Level 3 - both "higher and "lower" - maintain a certain discrete meaning (as restricted to just one level in each case), in truth their true nature is of a highly dynamic continuous level linking all "higher" and "lower" levels!.
Thus the baby infant in a sense at "lower" Level 3 accesses all levels on the spectrum (in a highly confused manner).
Likewise the advanced contemplative - with certain important limitations - at "higher" Level 3 accesses all levels on the spectrum (in a corresponding mature manner). And both of these Bands remain intimately connected with each other throughout development!
However the major weakness of my approach at that time - which I was only later to clearly realise - is that the middle levels (associated with specialised linear type understanding) became significantly bypassed. What I was really describing was the integration of Bands 1 with Band 3. However, though I indeed recognised the importance of Band 2 (with respect to the specialised differentiation of activity), I was not yet able to show how this Band could then be successfully integrated with both "higher" and "lower" bands.
At that time, I mistakenly believed in a "happy ever after" scenario, whereas the full radial structures, where both dual and nondual would successfully interpenetrate with each other, would now quickly occur in development.
However I was to slowly realise that in balanced development, equal attention needs to be given to both the "ascent" and the "descent". So I had only really yet outlined the "ascent" with respect to development, with the tricky task of successful "descent" to be yet negotiated.
However despite this, the subsequent years have only deepened my conviction in the value of the holistic mathematical approach to development.
My understanding of how it operates has indeed become more refined. However the basic insights that I formulated in the early 90's were certainly all on the right track.
Comments
Post a Comment