Is the two-chamber spirit associated with enlightenment


Start next


(3.2) Link back to the origin





JEvery cultural revolution of mankind has included a regression that is partially - and that is, controlled by the ascension orientation - a renewed passage through the original forces, through the anthropological substance, through the primal problems of human existence, i.e. also through their primal fears.

It is Faust's walk to the mothers, to the sources of our vitality. Of course it is important that "Faust" goes and not that "servant" in us, from Holderlin says, who is surprised that the hollow pot sounds so dull when someone throws it against the wall.

The ghost, in which we have to make our way to the mothers, no one else has described it better than Lewis Mumford in what is probably his most visionary book, in his , which I have just mentioned. He anticipated the from the outset beyond the intellectual cheap and financial maximum prices.

In view of the impasse of "postmodern man" as a thinking ant who abandons itself to the course of its alienated essential forces and "applies to itself the same principles according to which it deals with the physical world", 114 he comes to the conclusion:

But in order to overcome the blind urge to automatism, humanity as a whole must consciously steer back into the long trajectory of development which in the beginning made hominids human. (115) The most important task of man today is to find a new self create that is capable of taming the forces that are now so aimlessly and yet so compellingly at work.

This self will include the whole world in his great work, the known and the recognizable, and will not try to impose a mechanical uniformity on it, but rather to shape it into an organic unity ...
... many social forces that are now working towards the destruction of man, such as Science, for example, will make a great contribution to this transformation, once the original idea - [here Mumford recalled speakers like Isaiah, Mo Di and Joachim Di Fiore; R.B.] - with its great view of the future everyone became aware of it. (116)

Mumford of course understands science as a human function, not as the work of specialists who want to secure a social identity against others. His gaze is directed towards wholeness and balance in human subjectivity:

In this reorientation of the person, elements of the human organism that have long been suppressed or beyond conscious control are brought back to light, recognized, recognized, reassessed and realigned. The development of the ability to recognize one's own self in its entirety and to subordinate each of its parts to a more uniform development must be both an object of objective science and a concern of subjective self-knowledge.

Here Mumford's perspective coincides completely with that of Gebser's , which I will include further below; he continues:

It is impossible to achieve the desired wholeness without giving priority to the truly integrating elements of personality, love, reason and the urge to perfection. 117

Not so indiscriminate and aimless "release of impulses repressed into the unconscious" (according to which a psychological weekend was only good because "a lot came up").

Mumford at detopia Gebser at detopia 261/262

Perhaps the greatest difficulty for man today is that, due to a general distrust of the values ​​postulated by 17th century science, he does not want to admit that wholeness can only be achieved through recognition, encouragement and rewarding of the highest, noblest impulses of personality can. The integration of the human being begins at the top, with an idea, and works downwards until it reaches the sympathetic nervous system, where an organic integration takes place, which now works upwards again until it comes into consciousness as an impulse to love or as a guiding thought ... The united human being must acknowledge the id without granting it priority; he must promote the super-ego without letting it suppress the energies it needs for its own development. (118)

Although Mumford's terminology is still based on Freud and less on later developments, he does not mean the repressive superego that moralizes in us from the alienated social powers, but rather the authority that we prefer today our true selves call. It is analogous with his concept of personality, which is also conceived from within and transcends egocentric expansion.

He is concerned with the demands that man must make on his present self with his own previous activity if he wants to catch up with and subordinate his practice again. Then we have to ask for even more (and certainly better) than the sublimation initiated by the masters of the Axial Age:

In order to be on good terms with all parts of humanity, we must be at peace with every part of our own selves, and in order to do justice to the formative forces in world culture ... we must emphasize the formative forces in the human self promote than even the axial person. Because we cannot create a unified world with divided, inhibited, fragmentary personalities which, by their very nature, would inevitably cause complications, conflicts, conflict and disintegration. Only the idea of ​​the whole person, who is conscious of the whole, does justice to all personality types, all cultural forms and all human possibilities and abilities. 119

There is no better way of expressing the basic attitude with which I approach the political problem of building a bridge between dealing with our ego structures and dealing with our institutions better than with Mumford.


Because it is Mumford's basic idea that, in order to achieve a liveable world culture, we have to create a new self, i.e. a new integration of our subjective essential forces. Of course, what we can institutionally implement will then work back in order to broaden the stream of new subjectivity. I just want to add a single accent to what has been quoted: If we want to promote the true self, "without letting it suppress the energies that it needs for its own development", we are allowed to go through Moments Do not shy away from disintegration, nothingness and chaos, because the "highest, noblest impulses" cannot get rid of their repressive, Apollonian, repressive element without this risk, which, for example, makes so many anthroposophists look so melancholy.

Without the courage to call Dionysus, with his precautionary defamation as "fascistoid", we will not get away, rather he will appear to us again as Satan. A certain psychological "anti-fascism" shows exactly the fear that teaches the dog about it; that he should bite here.

Without question, integration can only be a forward and upward process that spans every partial regression. But the Apollonian fear of the deep forces wants to ensure that we with the Escape to stay forward and upward, which is so characteristic of the male spirit, and she simply does not want to admit and take into account that she herself created Dionysus to the devil. We have to return to the breakpoint, we have to finally heal from this fear. Of course, Dionysus is already a god of offended Great mother who also wanted to tear the man apart (see Neumann's book about the great mother). The human being - man and woman - should now have reached the maturity to deal differently with this primal problem of sex and the spirit, but at least courageously to deal withinstead of ignoring it and continuing to suppress it.

Goethe's Faust had only completely "dedicated himself to magic" and allowed himself to be enfeoffed by the devil with the "realms of the world and its glories" after the contact with the world spirit and the closer earth spirit (but probably the sphere of the mothers) had overwhelmed him .


In the ministries of Mephistus, the substitute character of the projects and gratifications that Faust pursues is always expressed. How did the contact with "that which holds the world in its innermost part" get lost, how was it torn off, so that we now have to confirm our belonging to life through knowledge of the external world, because we no longer know it directly organismically "? For in this break, in the fact that self-consciousness in the form of the masculine, especially the European-masculine logo, has fearfully defended itself against nature, the body, the woman, the feminine, lies the root of the ecological catastrophe, the drive to compensatory Accumulation of insignia and things, knowledge and victories.


In his "Origin and Presence", Jean Gebser identified five constitutions of consciousness of the human species as going through more or less one after the other and identified the steps that connect them to our cultural evolution. I will get to its bottom line later, in the section on "Homo integralis". First of all, I am interested in his scheme as such, his route map, and I am particularly interested in the downward-pointing arrows that I have emphasized through the intensified drawing. They should indicate the repulsion, the recoil, which accompanies the advance to the next higher level of development (now, with the evolutionary step to "Integrat", this repulsion should be avoided, but is only too noticeable in the aversion to all mental rationales) .

The little arrows to the side should symbolize becoming critical, inefficient, Gebser says becoming deficient, overtaken, failure of the respective state of consciousness, which sometimes leads to dead ends or into emptiness, and sometimes initiates the next step.


Often, when the next level that we are to reach seems threateningly overwhelming, we want to flee back to older states, and the repulsive energy is directed against this tendency.

At the historical jumps these were once acute problems, especially since the old state of consciousness, solidified in rites and customs, the new one as little voluntarily as a blackberry hedge releases its prince. Today the earlier, pre-mental states are certainly no longer what they used to be, at least for the fully developed rational ego, when they corresponded to the size and scope of the communities that got along with these less developed communication patterns. They are neither as powerful nor as efficient as they were then. We, in our regressions, end up with fragments of the former structures into which they disintegrated rather than they became deficient.

Gebser has already warned against relapses, and based on corresponding insights into the current psycho scene and into the New Age-Feld, Ken Wilber underlined: Different than currently for the purpose of integration going "upwards" (for which they have to be consciously brought to mind) there is no point in getting involved with the older constitutions of consciousness and their elements.

But there is a big problem which in reality is not so easily distinguishable from the aspect mentioned above. It is the cause of the tendency towards regression and, to a certain extent, justifies its necessity: the detachment from an obsolete level in both personal and tribal history does not come off without conflict and struggle. Compared to the sheltering "archaic womb", the individual psyche that outgrows it is relatively powerless and insecure, and also feels held back. Yes, the mother powers often "curse" the distance from their area of ​​attraction. Power magic the psyche then turns against the general ground, the origin from which it comes.

Jean Gebser at detopia Ken Wilber at detopia


This is repeated in the "dragon fight" of the mythical Consciousness heroes against the psychological "structure of the Great Mother (Neumann, as mentioned), in order to get out of the" cave "into the full light of the sun. And for the next step, Julian Jaynes has the transition from the mythical to the mental as an extremely dramatic and painful" collapse of the two-chamber spirit "(in which the gods had spoken to us from our own right hemisphere) by emphasizing its character as a social catastrophe.

Each time a "battle" took place in which the earlier constitution of consciousness was treated hostile because of its defense by the social apparatus that had come into being with it. On the other hand, the later one did not yet have the sovereignty to integrate, but tended of its own accord to fearfully repel or at least to withdraw. Only with the ascent from mental to integral consciousness on the way of "individuation" (the term comes from the C.G. Jungs school) does it promise to become different. But the previous transition has not yet been completed for many people and peoples, and at the same time its goal is the efficient mental ego structure, as it had once been achieved by a Socrates, blocked and discredited because instead of it the rationalistic demon rules, entrenched in the western mega-machine.


The other day we - "father-mother-child" - visited the school in which "child" is now to go from the 5th grade onwards, an opulent masterpiece of equipment from the fattest years of the Federal Republic and its educational policy. I saw science university institutes over there in the 50s and 60s that lagged behind. In this school building, the mental structure is now conveyed extensively. Who does not go through, remains "at the same time".

So either paralyzing fear and dull illiteracy in front of the mega-machine - or trust in it to the point of being devoured by this monstrous dragon that man has ever dealt with ?! Because what is being taught there, beyond all the good will of the teachers, is this necrophilic, murderous and suicidal rationalistic culture.


Gebser gives as a general criterion that a state of consciousness, a social communication structure is inadequate, that it has become "deficient", the Inflation of quantity at that time of the magical objects that multiplied like cancer cells through the cultural exchange as well as through the decay of the tribal patterns, then the increasingly obscure, decadent and incoherent mythology in the Hellenistic era, now the "facts" and mass products (it is just not true that the Knowledge doubled every few years just because they are so incessantly producing information in the silos of big science).

As early as 1953 Gebser wrote:

The prayer wheels (of old Tibet - R. B.), the fragmentation of myths, the computers are expressions of the human being who remains in his consciousness frequency while the necessary new consciousness mutation already begins to superimpose the exhausted consciousness structure. Any excess of quantification leads to powerlessness, emptiness and helplessness. Where this becomes evident, the no longer sufficient structure of consciousness has already been overcome. Seen in this way, computers are a negative symbol of the new structure of consciousness and its powers.120

That sounds too optimistic, but he added that when the task of transition isn't there "will be resolved in the near future", will "their solution requires inconceivable sacrifices". And: "The number of people who will experience the solution depends on the time-consuming awareness of the new structure." And finally: "No new structure emerges from the exhausted structure; but from what original is from the wholeness."121

What is meant by the emphasized word is that the genotype those forces from which the constitutions of consciousness were formed, also those dispositions that are in the efficient old ones entered, always present here and now, only caught and caught up in the prevailing structure. How much but they are arrested because we have repelled ourselves from the source and broken off the connections down to the sensibility and physiology - this unprecedented one dimension he has given too little emphasis on alienation. We are locked off and split off by socialization for our mega-machine.


And other parts of our psyche are banned into the fragmentation of older constitutions of consciousness; This non-simultaneity, too, more widespread than ever, is an enormous problem that complicates solidarity-based union.

Just that efficient mental structure (or shall we say it more efficiently proportion ofwhich legitimizes them) inevitably suppresses all psychological reactions that are rooted in older world conditions. People who still have their focus there and are more often aware of their original forces (children and many women) suffer directly from the overall pressure of a culture that has put abstract, anti-life on the throne. This in no way means that they cannot think, but they are perhaps mainly negatively impressed by the cunning Odysseus' ability to lie inscrutable - an advance in consciousness for which he has been praised.

Socrates was already hostile to concrete life, he reduced contact with nature, everyday life, the body, the woman. There is something fundamentally wrong with life in this "mentality" .122 "State affairs and philosophizing" were, as is well known, the only worthy occupations for the man of the polis. Even then, that was abstract enough. As is the case with today's size and complexity of the mental sphere, which is correlative to the mega-machine. Whoever concentrates on science, technology, world market, state in order to be "at the same time" has to lose his concrete life and will spread frustration and misfortune to the intimate sphere of his fellow co-workers.


Homo Integralis


As it turned out, the disaster is nested in the separation, the separation from the origin, in the antagonistic repulsion itself. Obviously, it cannot be avoided from the outset, neither in history nor in individual life, so that we need a practice of reunification, integration, socially and individual, remembering the word of Goethe "Nothing is inside, nothing is outside, because what is inside is outside."


Let us realize again that the dilemma has to do with our greatest achievement, with our personality fixed against the world. For this we are - it happens anew in every individual life - driven out of paradise, from the world outside of our skin, often from our own body, even from our own undesirable parts of the ego (perhaps the most vital ?!), and it can what is excluded becomes our enemy.123 In addition, there is desensitization training in urban and industrial everyday life, and even more so in the case of intellectual workers (also in the office). Just as we originally had to give up our instincts for our freedom when we left animal life, so we later left our older states of consciousness with their so much more satisfying sensual contact with the world for civilization.

The I or the character or - from the social side - the personality is the guardian behind all these separations: the personality not as a chosen figure, but as the more or less unreflected, unenlightened product of socialization. Our European culture is distinguished by the scope it offers it to develop. But the wolfish lack of ties that emerged, this inevitable misunderstanding of freedom, is at the same time their curse. We see it now.

One loves to reprimand Hegel for his sentence, which is then always understood in abbreviated form, Freedom is insight into necessity. But of course there was also necessity for this rational mystic in U.S, and it was identical with our highest, with the divine spark of Meister Eckhart. Freedom, rightly understood, means in Hegel that we recognize our inner equality of essence with the divinity, that we should identify ourselves with this, our highest necessity. In contrast, the usual anarcho-individualistic concept of freedom, including the associated personality concept, is a nonsense.

The "positive" content of the bourgeois personality is above all its position of the greatest possible inviolability, security of supply, situation control and comfort, all in all an egocentric active or passive position of power on which love cannot develop.


This ego profile is inseparable from the ideal of freedom and independence of civil society, which I valued and criticized in the chapter on capitalist drive and especially in the section there on money and freedom, as an image of man that we must internally go beyond. Attention and communication are clearly subject to the ego interests posted in this way. Difference and competition between personalities are so dominant that communion is basically impossible. All life force is put into the distinction, the separation, the alienation of the human being from the human being, and into this self-alienation from the body and from one's own shadow powers mentioned above.

Freedom in that great Hegelian or Eckhartian sense would be precisely to overcome this. Guardini once spoke of that center, in the human being yourself would find and god. There is freedom, and - despite all the differences in the individual genotype, we are largely one there. Should it be impossible to found society, community on it? So the differences do not have to be smoothed out. Hegel, Holderlin, Schelling, when they agreed on their slogan: "Kingdom of God!" - did they not love freedom? Were they not able to conspire in the same breath for "Reason, Freedom and the Invisible Church" ?! This quaternity - I repeat: Kingdom of God, Reason, Freedom, the Invisible Church - to be able to think together, that is the summit of the European spirit, and that is at the same time the step beyond the barrier of Europe.124

I will come to Fichte, later, who was perhaps the greatest in this crossing, because he - like someone next to him who had the same path, Beethoven - had relied on the sovereign self to the utmost and then in a huge arc at Laudse's criticism on the "self", on the great subjective self, arrived, not humbly, no, but with open arms, and not quietist, for example, but at the time of his speeches to the German nation. Not as a withdrawal, but as a transfiguration.

But I'm getting ahead.


At that time you mainly achieved it in your head, those were the times. It was, so to speak, German Jnana Yoga.125 They were bodhisattvas like no other. They all knew rapture. And they did not flee the women. There was Diotima-Susette. There were Josephine and Antonie, the immortal lovers of the famous letter (there is a deep and witty book by Harry Goldschmidt about it: "Beethoven's Beloved"). There was Caroline Schelling. It is the free use of all our powers that brings joy, and for this we need communion with the entire universe that can be reached by our senses, our soul, our spirit.

Certainly, that's what the personality wants. She put herself up there around for the sake of such gain, around for love's sake around - to deserve it, to be worthy of it. But wanting to be loved takes precedence over loving, and so the path largely contradicts the goal. Niklas Luhmann has shown in great detail and aptly how erotic love fails, because we not only turn our fortifications towards one another, but encounter each other as worlds that are increasingly different, but which require confirmation. We want our empirical ego to be loved, seek “validation (i.e. positive evaluation) of its self-representation” 126, where a Novalis saw love aimed at mutual transcendence in “the ego of our ego”, in our higher self. Isn't it the case, as Luhmann states: "Individuality ... becomes a claim to recognition of stubborn world and self-conceptions and thus becomes an imposition" 127 and that "the potential for conflict increases when the partners intensify their relationships"? 128

The personality is a faulty construction, it at least becomes one, has become.


I wanted to hint at that before I get a little closer to Jean Gebser's concept of the homo integralis deal to develop it a little further, because that is how the blood flows into the more abstract matter it offers. Looking at the following sketch, I would like to say for orientation that the personality, as I have admittedly very pointedly portrayed as to be overcome, the self of Gebser's mental level, and in contrast that which the classics, including Tagore, are all aiming at , the integral self. Gebser introduces a few strategies on how we should deal with the marginalized and split off, so that the ascent to integral self succeed. Because here the straight path of the vertical arrow from the mental to the integral constitution of consciousness is definitely not the shortest, because the mental ego has too many cavities, the substance that is to be integrated is not represented.


I'm discussing the model for the sake of the various curved arrows I've added. I only pulled out the trappings, the verbal schematism, in order to at least hint at Gebser's broader horizon, without wanting to refer to it in more detail. But I have to start with the structure as such.

Earlier on (p. 264) I referred to the basic structure of this scheme and the repulsive character of the previous mutations. That is now the starting point: we have not been able, step by step - and especially in our hasty competition, we whites - to integrate the roots of consciousness. We missed this in two respects, both in terms of cultural conditioned levels of consciousness (even the archaic one is a cultural achievement) as well as those that are even further back sociobiological Evolutionary steps that led up to our quality of consciousness.

"Archaic"corresponds to the spinal cord and the reptilian brainstem. In other words, in that state the state of mind determined by these organs still prevails (although there were also abstract mental operations early on).

"Magical"corresponds to the limbic system, and our" mammalian body "has the lead (in Wilber: the typhon).

"Mythical"already corresponds with the cerebrum, but - as Jaynes discovered in his book about the" two-chamber spirit "- with its more objective, its organ wisdom: While at that time humans still believed that the heart was the organ of thought, the gods spoke from the intuitive right hemisphere of the brain into his left; the cerebrum still has much more of it than that it has it.

"Mentally"first corresponds to the cerebrum as our organ. The ego finally tries to rider the horse of the body, but it sorts and delimits itself; enough has already been said about that.

"integral"- that is the subject of this section that has also already been posted.


Scheme of the mutations of consciousness (freely based on Gebser)


On each older We are more impartial because we are less self-conscious with regard to our elementary life processes. Each newerFirst of all, a higher level tends to disturb the wisdom of the "objective", the "being in itself" spirit that is contained in the code of life itself. We move away from the immanent deity, fill in the entrances to it. We leave them behind instead of gradually developing them. Our true self, the part of the primordial reason that we have in us, can no longer express its will due to the sheer unconventional controls from above.

Of course we all participate more or less in all five states of consciousness, and also in the male and female spirit. But the centers of our identities are different. This is the same as with the chakras and circuits, the scale of which is in some ways a more detailed breakdown of the same history. Gebser focuses on the intellectual function, on the aspect of rational knowledge and its change, but refers directly to its coupling with social world conditions. Wilber followed him even more fully.

How the individuals are at home on these different levels depends on them deepest social tension that most general Dimensions of inequality together, such as the relationship between dominance and submission within of associations that may be united in their class interests. Caste is superior to class, and in the end Bismarck and Lassalle, for example, belonged to the same caste. Opinions differ in the truest sense of the word about in which state of consciousness, via which circuit, via which of the three boxes of a (Leary-Wilson) circuit we primarily communicate with the world.

When Ernst Bloch speaks of the "non-simultaneity" of social groups, this is actually what is meant; the peasants, for example, not only belong to a certain degree older (feudal or pre-feudal) social formations than industrial workers and Capitalists, but to this extent they live psychologically in another world, and that is more fundamental for their subjectivity than any sociologically attributable qualities that fit into the scheme of capitalist modernity.


The societies too one time and one Landes are, among other things, stratified as the first column in Gebser's scheme of consciousness mutations just quoted suggests: Horde people, tribal people, townspeople, rationalist modernity and spiritual postmodernism live among us (cum grano salis). And despite all the inertia and disruptive factors that work from the bottom up and are reinforced by their suppression, the initiative is "above". The future will be decided in the struggle between the mental and the integral elites, with the front line often of course passes through the middle of one and the same individuals and elements of older constitutions of consciousness are always at play.129 Integration is crucial: The higher consciousness asserts itself by including its preliminary stages and opposites instead of excluding and reconciling everything that has split off, as, for example, Holderlin had anticipated: "Reconciliation is in the middle of an argument and everything that has been separated is found again. "

With the curved arrows that I have drawn in Gebser's diagram, I want to symbolize the movement (the dynamic structure of the movements) that defines this process of integration. Because even if I have already inserted the integral level into the picture as manifest: in reality it naturally only arises; and that does not have to rule out the fact that it - as genetically intended, preprogrammed - already "pulls" vigorously: In the sketch I have attached the greatest importance to the impulse with which it acts on the mental state of consciousness.130

So it is not so much the widespread diversity of products and knowledge that should be integrated (the political left has always pointed to the abolition of alienation), but the anthropologically indispensable step foundation on which - however antagonistic - modern consciousness rises ungratefully. The crux is not alienation from the things we do, but alienation from our natural potential, including the potential for developing our mental faculties, which we absorb and freeze through the service of quantity.


The spontaneous wisdom and vitality of the archaic, magical and mythical state of consciousness is an irreplaceable regulator. But we drive them out in early childhood. Striving for power, wanting to prove it to the world, becomes the closest compensation for the suppressed eros, for the general tone that has been pushed into the melancholy.

The (simple) arrows on the left, descending from the mental, are supposed to indicate a necessity of the male, the ascending arrows on the right reverse one of the female Characterize spirit today. Male and female are not necessarily the same as man and woman.But men in our civilization will be decidedly more often one-sided mentally, cerebrally fixed, function rationally and machine-like, and women will have more frequent and stronger contact with the structures of consciousness in which the roots of human culture are to be sought; on the other hand, they will often react inadequately because the powers that live there are deformed and pushed aside, not connected to a balanced whole

We can hardly hope to simply ascend "in a straight line" from the mental to the integral structure, because it is precisely those who, with their schizoid ego basis, are most representative of the "mentality" and whose peculiar housing - substitute for the uterus - is the mega-machine, the origin largely no longer felt. On the other hand, the patriarchal spirit, especially in its current deficient form, has spoiled the ascent to and above the mental ego for all people who have their existential focus closer to life, including most women.

At the same time, female thinking has been moving more and more towards conquering this position in the last 200 years. In part, every modern female consciousness - not without signs of increased self-alienation - goes through it. A self-conscious (in the sense of self-known) ego, in so far as a self-determined psychoanalysis as possible (in a general, not necessarily therapeutic sense) has become a co-condition of individuation. And yet, on the whole, it should be avoidable that people - from childhood - are again chased through this dysfunctional state of consciousness.


The appropriation of rationality would have to be recast from the integral level. That is why I have led the curved arrows on the right, which open up from the archaic, magical and mythical to the integral, past the mental in order to let them touch it in a loop, from above, so to speak.

With the descending arrows on the left, I want to indicate the diving back, the partial regression into the older and more fundamental layers, and then in the ascent the mental and integral classification of the journey into the underworld. This passage is not only biographically highly significant for individuation (in the Jungian sense), but above all socially extremely important. It concerns both the dissolution of the herd, in which the stress has accumulated in evil repressions, where they wait for their breakthrough in times of crisis, as well as the understanding with the "non-simultaneous" potentials, for which paths of integration and reconciliation are opened. Last but not least, the mental ego experiences the revitalization, the revitalization of its own biopsychic foundation. The upward flow of energy is broadening.

The discipline of the rational plane does not have to be given up. The "Indian" criticism of the "mind" is directed against the automatism, the robotic functioning of the thinking apparatus, not against precise, clear thinkingof which we need more, not less. Incidentally, emotion is in the average case much more automated than mind, which is only often taken into service and corrupted by the care and status interests. The key to the reasonable selfishness I spoke of is, of course, reason. In other words: the process of integration must itself be understood integrally. The anti-thinking motives are just foam on the waves. The one for that New Ageimportant conceptual drafts and even the speeches of the "mind" -critical gurus are mostly intellectually demanding.

What we want to switch off in order to go on a journey to the underworld is that censorship, for which the intellect only provides us with somewhat more refined means - just as we can use it to erect fine barricades against the abandonment of the egocentric basic position.


But this basic position, not its intellectual resource, is the problem. We can just as well use the mind to make it clear to ourselves that the real step that leads into the integration process is the holistic, i.e. physical, mental and spiritual contact with what has been separated and repressed. And then we need critical reason to cope with the experience, as well as some thoroughly old-fashioned discipline so as not to simply surrender to the inflation of the psychological phenomena that we encounter again in the underworld.

Integration (individuation) is the main way of leaving the doomed old cultural context. The methods all boil down to one thing: to free ourselves from the deeply internalized, limited socialization with which we are prepared for this exterministic civilization. The reconfiguration of our inner form - which will in any case be closer to our co-born image than our usual armor and masking - is not determined by a therapist or a guru, but the liberated vital potential itself. Man would not have ascended this far, would not have himself again and again raised above his self-humiliation if this potential were not ultimately positive. We have to free it from the remnants of the trauma experienced with the entry into culture, which found its expression in the conception of original sin, which is as explainable as it is hostile to life.

The whole process in which we reappropriate our essential forces is also historically, not only individually fruitful, only if we already have in mind a model of the new "objective spirit" that is growing with us, so to speak: another concept of society circulating in the network of the reversal movement . Homo integralis (which naturally also contains the homo occidentalis, the homo conquistador, in itself in Europe) means as much the individual as the social ensemble that directs its released forces in the direction of salvation.


All stages of consciousness development are stages of ego development. The ego transcendence, the overcoming of the egocentric position, presupposes the ego. It is exceeded, not extinguished in the higher self. All of the historical epochs elaborated by Gebser and Wilber as well as by Mumford and many others are derived from predominant forms of individuality. Mumford's new self, the "superconscious" homo integralis or whatever we want to call it, is not the first but a more comprehensive integration. The decisive difference between "I" and "Self" is obviously that the egocentric perspective is replaced by the lived psychological basic position "The center is everywhere" (and "The whole reaches out" or "The truth is the whole" - Hegel).

Leaving the fateful position of the top parasite means nothing else than this transition in which we place the fundamental human interests that are given with our microcosmic function as a whole above our immediate interests, and equally our long-term interests (even above the own lifetime beyond) higher than our short-term and the social and community higher than our individual places.

However, these comparisons lose their meaning once the leap is successful, because then it turns out that this is also the best way to protect immediate, short-term and individual interests. As the Tibetan Tarthang Tulku, who lives in America, says, the exclusion of fundamental, long-term and general interests results from the assumption of selfish existence. Then one occupies a niche exclusively and aggressively, and then one occupies a position in which "all maintenance and all contact can only be obtained by sending out after them" .132

If we imagine the whole of the world to be experienced as a sphere, the egocentric observer can only take in little of the "ten thousand beings" from his perspective, even if he takes up the position in the center. Every single science, art, craft or life practice means a different perspective, at least as far as the actor tries to disregard himself as the objective observer in science.


But in order to participate in the whole, we would have to perceive it not only from every point on the periphery of the sphere, but also from every place in the sphere at the same time. This means the formula "The center is everywhere". If not individually, then as humanity, we can approximately realize this. It depends on whether we, on the one hand, distancing ourselves from our immediate interests, on the other hand, bring about communion with the others, through which we can find connection to all possible perspectives (which are two sides of the same coin).

The thought is not even new. Laudse was the first to demand this replacement of the ego perspective at the same time politically and spiritually, and he suits our understanding very well in that, in the peculiarity of Asian thinking, he does not - like our Master Eckhart inevitably - first become deity through God comes.

Spinoza's great achievement in equating God with nature would have surprised Laudse because of the detour. He says "world" from the outset when he wants to designate the whole to whose organ man is called, and it is from here that he develops his image of a prince. Let us take a closer look at this at the end of this section, on the one hand as a piece of necessary regression, on the other hand as a piece of forward integration, because the old master was at the same time ahead of us. In any case, I am interested in homo integralis precisely in this dimension of political responsibility, in the subjectivity that can support it.

In his Daudedsching the enlightened sage and he who, as a result of his conformity with the nature of things, would be called to be "master of the world" are one and the same figure, and this is at the same time identical with the subject of the whole teaching. Everyone should be worthy of being master of the world. Or mistress of the world: Michael Endes Childlike Empress popularizes the same figure, even if it is not as politically concrete as Laudse's was for his China. Wisdom and empire are. in everyone, in every woman. Only the way is cut off for this figure laid out in us by the self-centeredness, by the self in the sense of the selfish, the subjectivistic stubbornness:


I am attacked by great evils
because i own one myself
I would be free of myself
what evil would it be for me?
but to the one who makes the far to himself
if you leave them far,
the one who loves who equates himself far
one likes to entrust them far.133) (13th saying)

And whoever "accepts the misfortune of a country" in this spirit, it is said elsewhere, is "worthy of being lord of the world". Such a "does nothing for himself and does not want to be praised". Making the world a self, viewing the subject as the subject instead of the small private self - that is already Laudse's "aperspective", which Gebser identified as the most important characteristic of the homo integralis. Not self, but world-identified ("deity-identified"), and then, to repeat it: "one who loves to be equated with the world himself may be entrusted with the world."

Laudse himself had interpreted his position, which in reality was highly advanced, as a regained archaic one and opposed history. In the Warring States Period startled by what the selfish spirit is doing, he wanted not only to end it, but to undo it. He did not want to integrate upwards what had differentiated itself, but to dissolve it downwards, to shut down names, tools (division of labor), compensatory morality, retrospectively regulating institutions, etc. again or to make them superfluous again. (The other, Confucian way did not promise to abolish all the harmony-disrupting knowledge in a higher consciousness, but only to set limits - which would only perpetuate the epoch of unhappy consciousness.)

A consciousness, as we need it now, that would be able to "cosmos and history" (so the title of Eliade's pertinent "land register") to reconcile again, to let the arrow of development return to the cycle of eternal return (the not particularly real idea of ​​the "spiral", which is a circle and an ascending arrow in one) - such a consciousness was still at that time inconceivable.


Laudse's spirit is reminiscent of Great Second birth matrix: the horror associated with the initiation of the birth process while everything is still closed ahead is answered by the longing for a return to the previous "oceanic" security. The dhow describes the cosmogony in the womb as a pole of a natural order, the pole of the basic trust that supports it.

I feel like them through tantric rebirthing practice Great presents, the question has arisen what it could mean if we could all experience the way back to this Laudse paradise for real, not to remain where the individually conscious mind is still empty, simply does not exist, but to get out of this security and Serenity to develop the other modes and the later stages of our existence and especially to keep short the demons that lurk in our unconscious from the next two birth matrices.

We have to assume that our social conditions have increasingly confirmed and strengthened the negative experiences from our unconscious with each progress of our culture, which has repelled itself from the primordial foundation. The wheel just turned the wrong way round. That is why humanistic psychology and meditation endeavor to reverse the direction, to shift the weights into the positive, and therefore to integrate the demons, who lose much of their power when they are localized in the re-encounter and recognized as partial forces. The differentiation of the spirits that sometimes lead us needs to be practiced, then we will less easily fall for the wrong ones.

Laudse had - which was closer to the feminine time of eternal return, in which he was spiritually at home, and which was certainly more natural than it is to us - in his tantric breathing practice - so reassured himself of his basic trust that his persistence was destruction, suffering, Endangerment, not excluding death. The contradictions, or more precisely, the polarities, are all there - the social world remains in order if one accepts the polarities instead of creating a culture that flees from them and becomes exterministic because of the sheer security policy.

Laudse also knows - not in it cross over with Confucianism - that people are deviated from the Dau at any given point in time due to their individuality, their own sense of purpose.


So they have to culturally ensure that the harmony disturbance they cause is counterbalanced by a back regulation. That is why they always have a religious, moral, moral and legal order which, above all, has to keep the specific primordial phenomena of human existence - their unbound sexuality, their intelligence, their individuality, their interfering environmental relationship - in proportion. But his way was not to set this measure restrictively from outside, but to imitate in the spirit that self-regulation that is created for the satisfaction of needs of the fetus in the womb. This mother-child dyad doesn't have to know because it knows, doesn't have to do anything because everything happens.

Reaching the wisdom of the bios in a behavior-wise approach, that is Laudse's way.

The fact that he regressively absolutized it is quite irrelevant today, we can hardly correct enough in this direction. It certainly belongs to man too, not just to man, to be a warrior (the third birth matrix) and victor (the fourth). In Daudedsching it is written how a person is or can be a warrior and victor if he is rooted in this basic trust and does not even fear death. There is also another keynote than the power magic of Don Juan Castaneda or even that of the samurai.

"Wherever equal opponents compete in battle, the compassionate one wins"says Laudse(134) and:

winning is good - and that's enough
you don't dare to be a dictator
win and not boast
win and not boast
win and not be proud of the win
only forced to be a winner -
not to force 135

The association between Laudse and the practice of Great shows the identity of the material with which spirituality and consciousness research deal. I remember reading somewhere after C. G.Half of Jung's patients did not need therapy, they needed religiosity (by which he certainly did not mean pushing pews), and people a little over 40 did not need any therapy at all, but had to learn to pray.

Therapy creates the self-definition of the person as a "patient" and is aimed at correcting a deficiency around which the person first concentrates.

Meditation on the other hand (in the variety of its forms, rebirthing can be counted among it) creates space for the natural force of our genotype waiting beyond "health" and "illness" to work, it heals, ie it harmonizes from below, from the roots and sets the debilitating and deforming patterns that inhibit the natural flow of energy override or at least dampen them.

Much becomes ridiculous or irrelevant that otherwise eats at one's heart.







Rudolf Bahro 1987 Logic of Rescue DNB Book 1990 + register of persons