There was still one more, major stage or level of consciousness and culture yet to

Transcription

1 Level 6 (Green) Pluralist Postmodern There was still one more, major stage or level of consciousness and culture yet to emerge at large level 6 and this was announced with the student revolutions of the 60s (starting in May, 1968, Paris), which then spread around the world and eventually fleshed out movements only barely begun with the Enlightenment, including the important civil rights movement in America, the massive environmental movement worldwide, feminism on a personal and professional level, and multiculturalism in general in other words, the emergence of postmodernism. The post in postmodernism means that this next higher level, like all successively higher levels, brought a new and higher perspective into being where orange rational modernity introduced a 3rd-person perspective, this new stage known variously as pluralistic, postmodern, relativistic, sensitive, individualistic, multicultural (and given the color

2 green) came with the emergence of a 4 th -person perspective the capacity to reflect on, and criticize, 3 rd -person perspectives, including science, leading to a multitude of different or pluralistic views. (And pluralism the belief in many different but equally important approaches to reality can be taken to its limit, where it becomes relativism the belief that there are only multiple approaches, with absolutely no universal or globally unified approaches no Big Pictures that are true for everybody, just local, culturally constructed beliefs. Some developmentalists, such as Clare Graves, call this stage not the pluralistic but the relativistic, emphasizing this common characteristic of much of this stage.) This pluralistic/relativism led, among other things, to the whole immensely influential movement called deconstruction, where a higher 4 th -person perspective not always with the healthiest of motives reflected on the productions of previous levels and began criticizing and deconstructing them (especially their universal claims), pointing out their major limitations and partialities (namely, according to this view, there are no real universals, there is only local knowledge, and so, according to this stage, these universal claims to know truth for everybody are really just ways to impose one s own beliefs and values on others, a real attempt to oppress and dominate. So postmodernism became especially identified with aggressive critiques of any isms or Big Pictures of any type critiques of capitalism, of Marxism, of fundamentalism, racism, sexism, patriarchalism, ageism, speciesism, scientism, and so on and this was the basis of everything from the civil rights movement to handicapped parking spaces to hate crime legislation).

3 In many cases there was a fair amount of truth in their criticisms (all of the previous levels were, after all, narrower in scope and reach than this latest higher level); but postmodernism in general tended to be taken to extremes, where it contradicted itself. It maintained that all truths are culturally constructed; there are no universal truths; there are no Big Pictures or meta-narratives (such as the one I am giving now); that all knowledge is context-bound, and contexts are boundless, and thus depend endlessly on interpretation. The problem is, postmodernism (whose central claim is that all knowledge is culturally constructed) claims that all of those items I just listed are not mere cultural constructions or a simple pluralistic interpretation, but are absolutely true for all people, in all cultures, in all places, at all times. In short, they claim that it is universally true that there are no universal truths; they give a very Big Picture about why all Big Pictures are not true; they claim that theirs is a superior view, but they also claim that there are no superior views anywhere. Oops. So this tendency to self-contradiction has to be watched in any postmodern movement or idea including if it shows up in you, as we ll see. Most human rights organizations in the West are at this green pluralistic multicultural stage, or level 6. They believe that all people are absolutely equal a view known as egalitarianism and that no culture is superior to another culture. The majority of non-governmental organizations (called NGOs ) are at this green stage of values as well. This is where the common postmodern self-contradiction can come into play with unfortunate results. The standard NGO, with its postmodern relativistic values, believes that no culture is superior or better than another; and yet it goes into countries, where it is working, and assumes that its own values are in some ways better than or superior to those of the culture it is helping otherwise, why would it consider what it is

4 doing as being help, if it didn t have something more valuable to offer than what those receiving the help presently have? Thus many NGOs (with their level-6 values) go to work in a developing country whose major values are still at tribal red power (level 3) or traditional mythic fundamentalism (level 4) and attempt to impose their level-6 pluralistic values on the culture and population, and the whole endeavor backfires badly. (Thus, as an all-too-common example, imposing green democratic structures on such societies results simply in the free election of the next military dictator). Again, one of the important discoveries of developmental research is that level-stages of development can be accelerated but not skipped or bypassed, and so it is literally impossible for a level-3 or -4 entity to move directly to a level-6 entity any more than you can go from letters and words to paragraphs and skip sentences. Instead, a series of social and cultural systems, growing out of the organic background of the developing country itself and not imposed from the outside, needs to be proposed and put into place, so that there are stations of life (organizations, institutions, jobs and vocations, educational systems, governmental branches, and so on), each offering healthy and functional versions of each of the major stages of consciousness and culture none of which, remember, can be skipped. With few exceptions, the layer cake of a culture needs to be organically grown layer by layer by layer in order to take root at all. In the United States, approximately 40% of the population is at amber traditional mythic-religious values; about 50% at orange, modern, rational scientific values; and about 25% at green, pluralistic, postmodern values (that doesn t add up to 100% because of much overlap). Those 3 levels are both the 3 most common levels to evolutionarily emerge, and the 3 most prevalent levels in Western cultures. But so show that these are

5 merely theoretical speculations but real realities, simply notice that those three major value sets are exactly what is behind the so-called Culture Wars (those three value sets are the last three major levels of development to emerge in human history, and each is still fighting for dominance). It is widely agreed that the Culture Wars are a battle between traditional religious values, modern scientific values, and postmodern multicultural values exactly stages 4, 5, and 6. And as long as these 3 value sets are the major stages that Americans have access to, then these Culture Wars will continue unabated. And those 3 value sets are fighting each other in every single area of Western culture they are fighting in education, in politics, in international policy, in medicine, in law, in history interpretation, in science and religion virtually everywhere you look. These levels of Growing Up these structures of consciousness are very real, very powerful, and very present. Each of them is a hidden map and you can t change a person s hidden maps with arguments or data or evidence or proofs because what the map itself will accept as data or proof varies from map to map. Religious fundamentalists don t accept scientific proofs (of evolution, for example); they accept God s truth, as revealed in the Bible. And scientists don t accept religious so-called truths, which they see as childish myths. And postmodernists accept neither, seeing both as being mere social constructions of equal unreality. The Culture Wars is one of the easiest ways to see the reality of these stage-levels of development and their incredibly powerful influence in all areas of our life. And there will never be harmony in a culture that has these stages fighting with each other (unless there are yet higher stages that somehow, in offering yet higher wholeness, offer a way out a very real possibility which we will examine in just a moment).

6 For the time being, let s look at green pluralism or relativism (and start tracking these qualities to see if any apply to you). First of all, it believes that there is nothing superior anywhere in the world; what s true for a particular person is true for that person you can t go in and impose your beliefs on somebody, claiming that you are right and they are wrong. You have your truth, they have theirs, and that s it. Likewise, all ranking, all hierarchies, are strictly taboo. What s required are partnership societies, where all people and especially all men and all women are looked at equally. Even excellence and achievement the hallmarks of the previous modern stage are looked at suspiciously by green postmodernism, because that means you are making judgments about somebody being better or higher or more achieved than somebody else, and that is nothing but oppression. Meetings are considered a success, not if any conclusion is reached, but if everybody gets a chance to share their feelings; this tends to take forever, and few actual actions are taken. All previous approaches to a topic are considered essentially wrong, driven by oppression or patriarchy or sexism or racism or colonialism or imperialism, and green pluralism will redo all of this and do it right, based on pure equality, partnerships, and no ranking or hierarchical judging. And the new pluralistic approach is not based on abstract rationality or logic, but is based on feelings and comes straight from the heart, not the head; thinking is out, feeling is in. The heart is the basis of all important truth, and it must be embodied anchored in feelings, not thoughts. The notion of embodiment is huge for this stage. All the previous approaches are old paradigm, and this new approach is new paradigm old paradigm is rational, analytic, divisive, Newtonian-Cartesian, egocentric, Earth-hating and Earth-denying, sexist or patriarchal, racist, colonialist, built on rampant

7 commercialism and profit/greed; whereas the new paradigm is congruent with the new physics (meaning quantum physics, which is actually a century old now), is eco-centric instead of egocentric; is built on partnership, caring, and loving-kindness, is holistic and organic (not fragmented and mechanistic), is congruent with systems theory; is feminist, Gaia-focused, Earth-centered, and glocal (meaning global and local) oriented. Now the first thing you want to do, if you have a good deal of this stage in you, is pay particular attention to the ways that it contradicts itself. In fact, it has been strongly attacked by social philosophers for committing what is called a performative contradiction a big phrase that simply means you are actually doing, in your own behavior, what you claim either cannot be done at all, or is totally immoral if you do so you yourself are actually doing what you say either can t or shouldn t be done. We mentioned earlier that this pluralism or relativism (relativism being a more intense version of pluralism) maintains that all knowledge is a social construction and based on interpretation; that science is no more real than poetry because both are interpretations and are socially constructed; that all meaning is context-bound, which means there are no universal truths, only locally and culturally situated, socially constructed truths. But this pluralism believes that every one of those statements is not a mere interpretation or social construction, but is true for all people at all times in all cultures (thus claiming it is universally true that there are no universal truths might as well write 10 volumes claiming that writing doesn t exist). And although this pluralism claims that there are no superior views, and nobody has a right to tell somebody else what is true or not true, it clearly believes that its view is true and everybody who disagrees with them are wrong; their view is superior in a world where nothing is supposed to be superior.

8 So you might watch yourself for when you judge people for judging someone; or how you get down on people who engage in various sorts of ranking schemes; or feel uneasy around someone who feels that they have the truth and others don t. You ll see in these cases that you are doing exactly what you are condemning them for doing. You re judging them for judging; you re ranking them for ranking; you feel you have the truth, not them, when they claim they have the truth. You might say things like, What s true for you is true for you, I wouldn t dream of imposing on you but you strongly disagree with people who feel differently than that belief you would in fact like to impose your view on their view that imposes itself on others. In short, you want to treat all people equally, but you explicitly or implicitly loathe people who don t share that view. So you yourself are doing exactly what you say shouldn t be done. And the fact is, green says that it treats all people fairly and sees all people as equal but it loathes all orange values (particularly capitalism, business, profit, achievement and the recognition of excellence), and loathes all amber values, and it loathes all integral values, and so on. So, to begin with, watch the ways in which you judge when you judge people for making judgments. You will usually feel that you are free of nasty judgments, but all those other people are massively guilty of it whereas that belief itself is a judgment, a ranking, a hierarchy. So begin your mindfulness sessions by holding the very act of negative judgment in your awareness. Pick some particular example of when you judge somebody negatively, and hold that situation of your judging that person firmly in mind. For example, what is it like when you judge somebody negatively for being a racist? Feel that judging activity as deeply as you can; videotape it from every possible angle. Bring pure Witnessing to that feeling. (Now notice that judgment might in fact

9 be a true, universally valid judgment which I believe, in this case, that it is but if you allow that universally valid moral judgments are possible, then you are not contradicting yourself and, you are not a postmodern pluralist, either, who denies all universal judgments. So you might be either totally correct, or involved in a performative contradiction, depending on what you actually think about universal judgments. But, because the pluralistic stage is involved in many of the judgments we make correctly, or contradictorily we want to be aware of judgments in any case: those are subjects we want to make object. So let s proceed with Integral mindfulness on that area making judgments, starting with negative judgments: judging somebody for being intolerant, racist, sexist, and so on. Pick one, and let s proceed.) So what exactly does negative judgment feel like? What does looking down on somebody look like? What does it smell like? What color is it? Where is it located (head, heart, gut, elsewhere)? What are the characteristics of this person that you especially judge negatively? What is it about those characteristics that trigger this hidden judgment in you? You don t have to do anything about these judgments just hold them in the space of feeling-awareness and see them clearly as objects. Remember to alternate sessions of mindfully videotaping judgment with sessions of resting in limitless, unbounded Awareness, your ever-present I AMness. Notice that limitless, unbounded Awareness, with its radical Love, has a background of pure, absolute All-Acceptance: I the Lord make the Light to fall on the good and the back alike; I the Lord [or pure I AMness] do all these things. The worldcentric acceptance and nonjudmentalism that the pluralistic level at its best at least attempts to embrace is once again a quality moving closer to infinite Acceptance, infinite Nonjudmentalism,

10 infinite Mirror-Mind, infinite Love-Acceptance. It s just that, still bound to the selfcontraction and the separate-self sense, it doesn t quite get there fully, and so it ends up in contradictory confusions where it claims to accept everything but actually judges quite a few things. So just start by being aware of this limited and narrow judgmentalism make that the focus of your Integral Mindfulness, and then alternative that with resting in pure, limitless, unbounded Awareness with its infinite and all-pervasive Love- Acceptance and radical Nonjudmentalism. Now, shift the nature of judging just a little bit. Look at the things that you do judge once you recognize how widespread your judging is and see if there are areas that the judgment could actually be considered to be a good thing, or to be founded on truly legitimate reasons (and this is especially important if you are actually coming from this stage this will be looking at judgments that might be universally correct, even though, if you are at this stage, you will doubt that such things exist. So if you do doubt universal judgments really exist, then definitely continue with this exercise ). According to green postmodernism, there aren t any universally valid judgments or valus all ranking judgments are bad. But again, that itself is a ranking judgment it ranks nonranking as higher and better than ranking and that itself is a major ranking. So once you see that ranking is unavoidable and that is why you were doing so much of it, even when you claimed you weren t let s look at what the basis of some good guidelines for ranking might be. Now, this is tricky, because each level will have some quite different answers to this. So let s even go with the major values of this level the postmodern pluralistic,

11 level 6 and see when ranking would actually be considered not only okay, but recommended, something to be encouraged, according to this level s own values. This level values equality above almost everything else. So let s just notice that not all levels share this view. In fact, none of them do. Red power divides the world into predators and prey, and favors those things that help only itself, as predator, and nobody else; absolutely zero equality here. Amber fundamentalism divides the world into the saved and the damned, saints and sinners, and values only those who accept the correct savior; all others are infidels, bound to burn eternally in hell; only true believers are equal. And orange divides the world into winners and losers, and values accomplishment, merit, and excellence above all others none of this equality stuff. Only green values equality, and sees all people as being essential equal or egalitarian. So let s further notice that that level is itself just that a developmental level. It s stage-6 in an overall developmental scheme. So the first judgment you can make based on these stage-6 values is that that vertical development from archaic to magic to power to mythic to rational to pluralistic that development is much better than not having that development. In other words, those lower levels can be ranked and judged accordingly as being less valuable than this stage, level 6, because only this level believes in equality, and this level requires development. And the reason is that, as we have seen, each level of development is characterized by an increase in wholeness each level has an identity that gets larger and larger, more inclusive and more inclusive and you will treat people morally only if you identify with them. So red power treats only itself morally; amber ethnocentric treats all its religious brothers and sisters morally, but not all infidels. Orange modern expands rights to all humans, and begins to treat all humans fairly and

12 morally, but notices that some people share this view, and some don t, so it begins to judge people on how tolerant they are, or are not. And green pluralism takes this to its ultimate limit, where it goes overboard and claims to treat all people equally whether they treat others that way or not; whereas it should say, based on its own values, that anything that helps a person get to this stage where they can wish to treat people equally is good; not reaching this stage of wholeness, and thus not treating all people fairly, is bad, is wrong, is less good. And that s a truth that holds across the developmental spectrum namely, each level is adequate and good for its circumstances, but each higher level is more adequate and thus in some ways better increasingly more inclusive, more embracing, more whole, more compassionate, more moral, and more loving. And virtually every developmental test we have proves this out, showing that the capacity for love, consciousness, care, creativity, morality, compassion, and solidarity increases and becomes measurably greater with each stage of development. This is evolution in action; this Eros showing its true colors. So take Carol Gilligan s stages of female moral development. Gilligan became famous, in her book In a Different Voice, for suggesting that men and women reason differently men with an emphasis on hierarchy and autonomy, and women with an emphasis on relationship and belonging. Feminists jumped on the fact that because all hierarchies are allegedly bad, and men not women think hierarchically, then men (and the patriarchy) are to blame for most of humanity s ills. But Gilligan made a second point in that book, which was studiously ignored by feminists and postmodernists in general. Namely, both men and women develop through the same 4 basic hierarchical stages (her term). In women, Gilligan named these hierarchical levels: stage 1, or

13 selfish the woman cares only for herself (this is our egocentric); stage 2, or care the woman extends care from only herself to groups (our ethnocentric); stage 3, or universal care the woman extends care to all humans, regardless of race, color, sex, or creed (our worldcentric); and stage 4, which she called integrated where women and men integrate the other sex s attitude (our integral). So women might indeed tend to think non-hierarchically, but women s non-hierarchical thinking itself develops through 4 hierarchical stages. This simple fact, feminists (and postmodernists) still haven t grasped. But it does mean that we can t just say that what Western cultures under patriarchy need are more feminine values which is quite common to hear nowadays because clearly we don t need the first two stages of feminine values we do not need more selfish/narcissistic and sexist/racist thinking which are the first two (and largest set) of feminine values. Even according to these theorists including feminists those values are killing us. The higher stages of development (Gilligan s stages 3 and 4) are not equally good, they are better they have more wholeness, are more inclusive, and therefore are more moral, more caring, more loving, more valuable (and less oppressive, less dominating). We need the feminine values from the higher stages from worldcentric and integral (as well as masculine values from the same higher stages as well, it might be noted). That is a judgment that is true and good, and more people should begin thinking that way, because more people will be treated better the more that happens. So be careful when you think that you are not being judgmental, when in fact you are. And then look at the type of judgments you make, and try to base them on these

14 well-tested developmental facts. So we can say that each developmental level is good; but each higher level is more good more inclusive, more whole, more conscious, more moral, more caring (and research consistently shows exactly that; of course, higher stages also introduce their own new problems, which can only be defused at yet higher stages but that s just the nature of an ongoing evolutionary complexity). And if there are levels higher than level 6, then those levels would be even more more good, more valuable and there are. Before we get to those, notice that all of this points out an important fact, almost always overlooked by postmodern pluralism. There are two types of hierarchies, not just one. There are dominator hierarchies, and there are growth hierarchies. Dominator hierarchies are indeed nasty (oppressive and dominating) things like the caste system, or hierarchies in criminal organizations (where the higher the level you are, the more people you can dominate and oppress). But growth hierarchies are exactly the opposite the higher the level, the more inclusive, the more caring, the more loving and embracing (the less dominating and less oppressing) you are. All of the developmental models we are talking about here (including the 6-to-8 stages of Growing Up in general) are growth hierarchies, just like Carol Gilligan s. In fact, most hierarchies in nature are growth hierarchies like the central atoms to molecules to cells to organisms each of those levels transcends and includes its predecessor, so it becomes more and more whole, more and more inclusive, more and more embracing. And higher levels don t oppress lower levels, they embrace them, they enfold them. Molecules don t hate atoms, or oppress atoms, or dominate atoms they include them, they embrace them, if anything, they love them. So keep that in mind about the growth hierarchies that we are discussing.

15 And this will be particularly hard if you are basically pluralistic stage 6, because stage 6 inherently loathes and distrusts all hierarchies, without really realizing what it s doing. It s part of its performative contradiction it puts hierarchy on the lowest level of its hierarchy. So if you spot this stage-6 hidden map in yourself, using this Integral overview, then put it under the bright light of mindfulness, and videotape it from all possible angles. What you want to be aware of, to apply mindfulness to, is the simple attitude of judgment it can be negative judgment, or positive judgment, the point is simply to videotape the very act, the very feeling, of judging, of thinking or feeling that this is better than that. Now the point we just made is that in some cases, at least in the relative manifest world, sometimes one thing is better than another, and that s fine. But what we want to do here, with this mindfulness session, is transcend and include all judgment so that means, for the transcend part, we will want to be letting go of judgment itself altogether (and include it by simply being directly aware of it) but no identifying with it, condemning it, being one with it, negating it or condoning it just videotaping it, just applying feeling-awareness to this extraordinary activity of judging. This is BETTER than this just exactly WHAT does that feel like? Where is it located? What color is it, what shape is it, what does it look like, what does it smell like, what does it feel like? Get this judging attitude firmly in awareness, and then simply videotape it, fully, completely, carefully. Then, as we briefly mentioned already, alternate this focus on finite judgement-making with limitless, unbounded Awareness, with pure, ever-present, radically Loving and infinitely Accepting (Nonjudging) I AMness. There has been much

16 confusion in New-Age movements about nonjudgmental Awareness. The idea, taken mainly from Eastern traditions, is that our Awareness should have no judging at all. But this thoroughly confuses what the Traditions call relative and ultimate Truth. Relative truth is something like, Water is composed of 2 hydrogen atoms and 1 oygen atom that is a relative truth, and relative truths are important. But with regard to ultimate Truth, water is not made of hydrogen and oxygen, it is made of Spirit of Brahman, of the Tao, of Godhead, of Ein Sof, of the One. And in relative truth, there are good judgments and bad judgments in relative truth, worldcentric moral judgements are better that ethnocentric moral judgments. Those judgments are NOT supposed to be denied or pushed out of awareness or suspended. Running around with a non-judgmental relative awareness is to be crippled in the truths of this manifest, relative world. That is NOT what the wisdom Traditions mean by non-judgmental awareness. But alongside relative truths are ultimate truths and ultimate truths are ultimately nondual or not-two or beyond all judgments altogether beyond good and evil, beyond pleasure and pain, beyond happy and sad. Metaphorically ultimate Truth is sometimes referred to with terms like radical Love or Beauty or Goodness or Consciousness or the Ground of All Being but ultimately those are just concepts; and all concepts make sense only in terms of their opposites good versus evil, life versus death, enlightened versus ignorant, and so on but ultimate Reality has no opposite. Being radically all-inclusive, no concepts and thus no judgments at all correctly refer to it. So as you move from attention to relative judgments whether positive or negative to resting in ultimate Awareness, notice that ultimate Awareness, being

17 limitless and unbounded, draws no boundaries at all no inside versus outside, no past versus future, not good versus bad, no up versus down just pure Isness, pure Thusness, pure Suchness free of all concepts, feelings, notions, or ideas at all. The Christians call this the cloud of unknowing and the anaphatic path of Waking Up; Zen calls it don t know mind ; for Vedanta, it is nirguna Brahman ultimate unqualifiable Spirit; for Buddhism, it is the core notion of Emptiness ultimate Spirit can be referred to neither as A, nor not A, nor both, nor neither. As our final finite characteristic of stage-6, we ll use inclusiveness. The pluralistic level prides itself on its inclusiveness, or its nonmarginalizing. In a positive sense, this was behind everything from the civil rights movement to feminism to the environmental movement. And inclusiveness is another quality that is demonstrating a movement closer and closer to ultimate Truth, as we have seen with relative love, acceptance, and moral judgments. So after resting in pure Witnessing and centering there, focus on your own sense of identity get a strong, deep sense of the feeling of being identified with someone or something how your own ultimate I AMness becomes identifies with a relative I AM this or I AM that what is that identification movement? And then imagine it expanding to your include your family; then your circle of friends; then your colleague and business associates; then everybody in your state; then in your nation; then in the entire global village. Feel the deep solidarity expand and expand and expand. FEEL that expansion. So this continual expansion of self-identity from egocentric to ethnocentric to worldcentric to Kosmocentric represents the ongoing movement of evolution itself in the manifest realm, in the manifest universe, which, as we ve seen, is driven by a

18 constant Eros of transcend and include, transcend and include, so that each level or stage of evolution becomes more and more whole, more and more unified, more and more loving and caring and moral and accepting. And simultaneously, behind all of that, is the pure and unchanging Self, the pure Witness, which is pure limitless, unbounded Awareness, and is identified with absolutely nothing in the entire manifest world rather, as we ve seen, it is radically Free of all things, events, objects, persons, and occasions it is net, neti. But as evolution continues, and the relative self s identity becomes larger and larger and larger, there comes a point in the Waking Up process (which, remember, is occurring along with our exercises in Growing Up, because we are alternating focusing on the finite limited stages of Growing Up with the limitless, unbounded State of pure Awareness) and in that process of the relative self s increasing identity, there comes a point in Waking Up where the Witness itself completely vanishes and becomes one with absolutely everything that is arising in its Field of Awareness. That is pure unity consciousness the 5 th state of consciousness, which is beyond even the 4 th State, the state of Turiya or the Witness). So in one of the upcoming sessions very soon now we will finish the Waking Up process by directly experiencing this nondual unity consciousness, this pure One Taste where the entire universe arises within you, as you your ultimate and truest Condition. Right now, with pluralistic stage-6, there is another direct move to become more and more inclusive pulled by that allure of the One Taste of pure unity consciousness. But the pluralistic stage is still just a partial movement in that direction, so it end up not really liking any of the previous stages it loathes orange profit, capitalism, and business

19 in general; it despises amber fundamentalism and its belief in its one true way; it even spurns the levels higher than itself, and vocally condemns them. So as you bring Witnessing to bear on this fundamental process of inclusion what it really feels like, looks like, where it s located, and so on notice that it is always limited it is always identified with this but not with that; it likes this, but loathes that; it s glad to identify with this, but wouldn t touch that. Notice that that is what your own identity process is doing really feel that boundary between you and not-you. And then alternate that identity awareness with resting in limitless, unbounded Awareness, in your own pure, radically Free I AMness, which remains completely Free from any identity at all. This is the formless Ground of All Being, and it will always remain formless, empty, open, clear, an infinite Abyss of radical infinity, identified with absolutely nothing. But this pure Emptiness, this pure formlessness, this ever-present, clear, luminous, open I AMness and its radical Freedom (it s perfect non-identity or neti neti) is occurring right alongside the ever-expanding, ever-more-inclusive, ever-more-comprehensive course of evolution itself, until these two currents come crashing together, the Witness itself disappears into all that is witnessed and becomes radically one with it, and ultimate unity consciousness announces itself. We are coming closer and closer to that radical event, and we will finish our exploration of Waking Up by doing some exercises that will introduce you directly to this One Taste, to this ultimate unity consciousness, as this part of the developmental path continues its course straight to God. So until we meet again, on day-one of this practice period, focus on level 5 on excellence, achievement, and moral judgments; and alternate that with resting in pure

20 limitless, unbounded Awareness, noticing the difference (finite, narrow, and restricted versus infinite, limitless, and unbounded). Then on day-two of this overall session, focus on level 6 and it characteristics of judgment both negative judgment and positive judgment equality; and inclusion alternating that with resting in pure limitless, unbounded Awareness, and the eternally free and radically non-identified True Self or pure I AMness, noticing how you must surrender the infinite Freedom of the True Self in order to identify with a limited identity of self-contraction. Then back to day-one exercises, and so on until we meet again. So until then, Godspeed and good luck. This is Ken.