Tuesday, December 25, 2007

Mother's Agenda is the most profound document on transformation of the body and of the world ever written

Permalink Reply by M Alan Kazlev Dec 22 hi Metro!
True KW advocates a nondual position, but this is a New Paradigm/Rising Culture Westernised adaptation of original Advatin and Mahayana tradition. As Sri Aurobindo has shown, there are many stages beyond nondual, all the way to Supramentalisation. And the same with involution, the nondual is relatively low on the scale (but still transcendent of phenomena). I will be discussing all this in my book Integral Metaphysics and Transformation
Wilber gives only very cursory mention of Plotinus (although i'm happy he mentions and thus helps to popularise him!), and either little or nothing at all on Iamblichus, Proclus, ibn Arabi, Rumi, Isaac Luria, the Pratybhijna tradition, Western Hermeticism, Fourth Way, and other authentic esoteric teachings. Although he has the greatest respect for Sri Aurobindo, his interpretation of him is also extermely misleading and superficial, and he totally ignores The Mother (so does Michael Murphy), despite the fact that Mother's Agenda is the most profound document on transformation of the body and of the world ever written (i know the title is very off putting, i guess that's due to Satprem (her close disciple and the compiler of the material)
Permalink Reply by M Alan Kazlev Dec 13 hi Helen!
One reason I like Sri Aurobindo and the Mother is precisely because they represent both genders; it is a significant fact that the Integral Movement so far has snubbed or ignored the Mother, whose very down to Earth and heart-centered presence may be threatening to those masculinist intellects (I'm not trying to put them down or deny they do good work, but this is a shortcoming in the mainstream/traditional Integral Movement)...
The funny thing is, it's not like they are proposing different paths. With, for example, Ramana and Sri Aurobindo you have two great spiritual giants, geographically very close, contemporaries, yet one taught non-dual quietism, another a more dynamic action in the world. I honour both and see both as equal in their essence, even if I prefer SA's teaching on an intellectual and practical level for its greater inclusivity. But I can understand why, with such difeferent spiritual paths, they did not work together.But with integralists, new age, new paradigm, "evolutionary allies", etc it is deifferent; there is a lot of commonality, all represent an evolutionary social-spiritual approach, working to transcend old models and ways of doing things and bring about a new society. It is the same message, even if the surface details differ. So even if they cannot work together, I agree, so what, they should follow their bliss (I love Jospeh Campbell too :-)
And we can build on what they have achieved, but also surpass them if we don't allow ourselves to be limited in the same way.
"There are no maps for these territories".
Actually there are! Only it is upto us to create them. And each of us will create our own map, which represents our own respective sadhana. The childlike reliance on the teachings of monolithic authoriity figures belongs to the past. We can certainly use these earlier teachings as a baseline, as an orientating framework, or a guideline, but that does not mean they have to be followed in a cultic manner. And even the most profound and sublime teachings become limited when there is a lack of mental receptivity and openneness to other perspectives.For example my book in progress Integral Metaphysics and Transformation presents my own map of reality and evolution.
In it I honour Sri Aurobndo and the Mother as the most profound teachers i have ever found, and in my opinion the most profound teachers ever (because in 30 years i've never found anything or anyone more radical yet more clear and commons sesne) but i also bring (and equally honour) in many other teachings as well, such as Kasmir Shaivism, Plotinus, ibn Arabi, Isaac Luria, Darwin, Blavatsky, Theon, Steiner, Teilhard, Gurdjieff, Jung, Haskell, Jantsch, Adi Da, Wilber, Swimme... . But that's my map. You may have a have a different map. Someone else will have a different map again. And at the end of the day, these are just mental guidelines and conceptuial frameworks. it's how we put them in practice that matters.
And it is interesting to see what seems to be a collective proccess of emergence happening. So perhaps this is the next stage of what its all about.


  1. With all due respect to the Mother and her profound insights and demonstration, her work pales in comparison to this work---which the author knows about.

  2. I haven't read much of the mother but alot of Sri Aurobindo. Have you had a look at Bernadette Roberts? - she is very clear and well and truly no-self. Elysha is another interesting one to watch, perhaps in transition to no-self - again very clear.