Integral spiritual practice has come into its own in the last 25 years as a means of actualizing the integral theory of spirituality. Integral theory is author and philosopher Ken Wilber’s attempt to place a wide diversity of metaphysical theories and thinkers into one single framework. It is portrayed as a “theory of everything” (“the living Totality of matter, body, mind, soul, and spirit”), trying “to draw together an already existing number of separate paradigms into an interrelated network of approaches that are mutually enriching (Wikipedia).” Its most well-known proponent in recent decades has been Wilber, who has written a series of books from 1980 onward in which he gradually developed his views into a comprehensive map of human life and spiritual development. Integral spiritual practice is a broader movement based on integral theory (though some forms pre-date Wilber’s contributions) seeking to consolidate and assimilate the common and most effective spiritual practices in alignment with what is understood of man’s evolutionary development in both the physical and spiritual realms through the millennia from across all wisdom traditions.
Many dedicated practitioners—from both traditional and non-traditional backgrounds—are awakening into a new maturity, intelligence, depth, wholeness, and purpose in their spiritual lives. An “integral” wave of spiritual practice is now uniting the eternal truths of the ancient traditions with the realization that evolution is happening right now—in and through us—and thus spirituality itself is evolving too.
Terry Patten on Integral Spiritual Practice
It, and we, are headed somewhere. We can see the contours of an overarching Big Story and Purpose to it all. And yet, this story is not another metaphysical “grand narrative” handed down uncritically. Rather, Integral Spiritual Practice espouses an empirical set of ideas, based on both “hard” science and the hard-won insights of spiritual practitioners around the world. It is thus perfectly rational, and yet not limited to linear, materialistic rationality.
Integral Spiritual Practice seeks to foster a culture of open inquiry, dialogue, and accountability. It’s a new “skillful means” for devout (or irreverent) people of any faith (or no faith at all). It can be the basis for communities of practice of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists, and agnostics—or for communities of practice that include “all of the above.”
By providing an “orienting framework” … , it can be a bridge between sincere, intelligent people across sectarian divisions. It’s a clarifying context for anyone serious about growing… about cultivating more goodness, truth, and beauty… and for anyone serious about contributing to their world.
The following is an all-too-brief summary of a few of the pioneers and the early history of integral spirituality.
Pioneers of Integral Spirituality
Aurobindo
The adjective integral was first used in a spiritual context by Sri Aurobindo (1872–1950) from 1914 onward to describe his own spiritual teachings, which he referred to as Purna (Skt: “Full”) Yoga. It appeared in The Synthesis of Yoga, a book that was first published in serial form in the journal Arya and was revised several times since.
Sri Aurobindo’s work has been described as Integral Vedanta and Integral psychology, as well (the term coined by Indra Sen) and the psychotherapy that emerges from it. His writings influenced others who used the term “integral” in more philosophical or psychological contexts.
In the teachings of Sri Aurobindo, integral yoga refers to the process of the union of all the parts of one’s being with the Divine, and the transmutation of all of their jarring elements into a harmonious state of higher divine consciousness and existence.
As described by Sri Aurobindo and his co-worker The Mother (1878–1973), this spiritual teaching involves an integral divine transformation of the entire being, rather than the liberation of only a single faculty such as the intellect or the emotions or the body. According to Sri Aurobindo,
(T)he Divine is in his essence infinite and his manifestation too is multitudinously infinite. If that is so, it is not likely that our true integral perfection in being and in nature can come by one kind of realization alone; it must combine many different strands of divine experience. It cannot be reached by the exclusive pursuit of a single line of identity till that is raised to its absolute; it must harmonize many aspects of the Infinite. An integral consciousness with a multiform dynamic experience is essential for the complete transformation of our nature. — Sri Aurobindo, The Synthesis of Yoga, p. 114
Aurobindo’s ideas were further explored by Indra Sen (1903–1994) in the 1940s and 1950s, a psychologist, and devotee of Sri Aurobindo and The Mother. He was the first to coin the term “Integral psychology” to describe the psychological observations he found in Sri Aurobindo’s writings (which he contrasted with those of Western Psychology), and developed themes of “Integral Culture” and “Integral Man”.
These ideas were further developed by Haridas Chaudhuri (1913–1975), a Bengali philosopher and academic who founded the California Institute of Integral Studies in 1968.
Teilhard de Chardin
Pierre Teilhard de Chardin SJ; 1 May 1881 – 10 April 1955) was a French Jesuit priest, scientist, paleontologist, theologian, philosopher and teacher. He was Darwinian in outlook and the author of several influential theological and philosophical books. Teilhard de Chardin wrote two comprehensive works, The Phenomenon of Man and The Divine Milieu.
His posthumously published book, The Phenomenon of Man, set forth a sweeping account of the unfolding of the cosmos and the evolution of matter to humanity, to ultimately a reunion with Christ. In the book, Teilhard abandoned literal interpretations of creation in the Book of Genesis in favor of allegorical and theological interpretations. The unfolding of the material cosmos is described from primordial particles to the development of life, human beings and the noosphere, and finally to his vision of the Omega Point in the future, which is “pulling” all creation towards it. He was a leading proponent of orthogenesis, the idea that evolution occurs in a directional, goal-driven way. Teilhard argued in Darwinian terms with respect to biology, and supported the synthetic model of evolution, but argued in Lamarckian terms for the development of culture, primarily through the vehicle of education. Teilhard made a total commitment to the evolutionary process in the 1920s as the core of his spirituality, at a time when other religious thinkers felt evolutionary thinking challenged the structure of conventional Christian faith. He committed himself to what the evidence showed.
Teilhard’s life work was predicated on his conviction that human spiritual development is moved by the same universal laws as material development. He wrote, “…everything is the sum of the past” and “…nothing is comprehensible except through its history. ‘Nature’ is the equivalent of ‘becoming’, self-creation: this is the view to which experience irresistibly leads us. … There is nothing, not even the human soul, the highest spiritual manifestation we know of, that does not come within this universal law.” The Phenomenon of Man represents Teilhard’s attempt at reconciling his religious faith with his academic interests as a paleontologist. One particularly poignant observation in Teilhard’s book entails the notion that evolution is becoming an increasingly optional process. Teilhard points to the societal problems of isolation and marginalization as huge inhibitors of evolution, especially since evolution requires a unification of consciousness. He states that “no evolutionary future awaits anyone except in association with everyone else.” Teilhard argued that the human condition necessarily leads to the psychic unity of humankind, though he stressed that this unity can only be voluntary; this voluntary psychic unity he termed “unanimization”. Teilhard also states that “evolution is an ascent toward consciousness”, giving encephalization as an example of early stages, and therefore, signifies a continuous upsurge toward the Omega Point which, for all intents and purposes, is God.
Jean Gebser
The word integral was independently suggested by Jean Gebser (1905–1973), a Swiss phenomenologist and interdisciplinary scholar, in 1939 to describe his own intuition regarding the next structure of human consciousness. Gebser was the author of The Ever-Present Origin, which describes human history as a series of mutations in consciousness. He only afterwards discovered the similarity between his own ideas and those of Sri Aurobindo and Teilhard de Chardin. In his book The Ever-Present Origin, Gebser distinguished between five structures of consciousness: archaic, magic, mythical, mental, and integral. Gebser wrote that he was unaware of Sri Aurobindo’s prior usage of the term “integral”, which coincides to some extent with his own.
Georg Feuerstein
The German indologist Georg Feuerstein first wrote about Integralism in “Wholeness or Transcendence? Ancient Lessons for the Emerging Global Civilization” (1992). Feuerstein used this term to refer to a particular outlook on spirituality which he saw present in the Indian tantric traditions. Feuerstein outlined three major approaches to life in Indian spirituality: nivritti-marga (path of cessation), pravritti-marga (path of activity) and purna-marga (path of wholeness). The path of cessation is the traditional path of renunciation and asceticism practiced by sannyasins with the goal of liberation from this world, while the path of activity is the pursuit of worldly goods and happiness. Feuerstein ties this integral approach to nondual Indian philosophy and the tantric tradition. According to Feuerstein the integral or wholeness approach: “implies a total cognitive shift by which the phenomenal world is rendered transparent through superior wisdom. No longer are things seen as being strictly separated from one another, as if they were insular realities in themselves, but everything is seen together, understood together, and lived together. Whatever distinctions there may be, these are variations or manifestations of and within the selfsame Being.” An integral worldview also leads to body and sex positivism and an absence of asceticism. Even negative experiences such as pain and disgust are seen as integral to our life and world and thus are not rejected by the integral approach, but used skillfully.
Ken Wilber
Ken Wilber’s “Integral Theory” started as early as the 1970s, with the publication of The Spectrum of Consciousness, that attempted to synthesize eastern religious traditions with western structural stage theory, models of psychology development that describe human development as following a set course of stages of development.
Wilber’s ideas have grown more and more inclusive over the years, incorporating ontology, epistemology, and methodology. Wilber, drawing on both Aurobindo’s and Gebser’s theories, as well as on the writings of many other authors, created a theory which he calls AQAL, “All Quadrants All Levels”.
Ken Wilber’s AQAL, pronounced “ah-qwul”, is the basic framework of Integral Theory. It suggests that all human knowledge and experience can be placed in a four-quadrant grid, along the axes of “interior-exterior” and “individual-collective”. According to Wilber, it is one of the most comprehensive approaches to reality, a metatheory that attempts to explain how academic disciplines and every form of knowledge and experience fit together coherently.
AQAL is based on four fundamental concepts and a rest-category: four quadrants, several levels and lines of development, several states of consciousness, and “types”, topics which don’t fit into these four concepts. “Levels” are the stages of development, from pre-personal through personal to transpersonal. “Lines” are lines of development, the several domains of development, which may process uneven, with several stages of development in place at the various domains. “States” are states of consciousness; according to Wilber persons may have a terminal experience of a higher developmental stage.”Types” is a rest-category, for phenomena which don’t fit in the other four concepts. In order for an account of the Kosmos to be complete, Wilber believes that it must include each of these five categories. For Wilber, only such an account can be accurately called “integral”. In the essay, “Excerpt C: The Ways We Are in This Together”, Wilber describes AQAL as “one suggested architecture of the Kosmos”.
The model is topped with formless awareness, “the simple feeling of being,” which is equated with a range of “ultimates” from a variety of eastern traditions. This formless awareness transcends the phenomenal world, which is ultimately only an appearance of some transcendental reality. According to Wilber, the AQAL categories—quadrants, lines, levels, states, and types—describe the relative truth of the two truths doctrine of Buddhism.
Source: Wikipedia
Via Perennis 