The only real Shift
What is your life?
This is only an unusual question because we have been conditioned in certain ways that make it seem unusual. Most people would answer it by identifying specific overall content of their life, what they have and haven't done, what they do and don't do, or what they believe in or not. But that's not your life: that's only what you're doing or have done with your life, or that with which you fill it.
But what is your life? The answer is not found in the content of your life but in the context that holds the content, the canvas of your being and not the painting you create upon it. And that consideration leads to an entirely different estate of conscious living and expression.
In that way, if you are reading this piece, you must be an active seeker of the nature of Divine Being, which means you are interested in the ways the day-to-day content of your human experience relates to the greater context of your spiritual nature. This interest will inevitably draw you into becoming a consumer of various psychological and spiritual products and services, east and west, all of which are offered within very specific paradigms that govern the teaching, and within which all of their associated value systems express.
This website is based on a radical notion: that all the eastern and western spiritual paradigms and teachings of the past that still live in pure or hybridized forms and draw adherents today, were and are all based in a pre-egoic phase of human consciousness evolution. Most of them originated in the axial age of our past, where so many of the great teachers such as Gotama and Yeshua brought forth ideas that for that age were revolutionary.
But what if the world-views they claim are timeless are not, in that most of the dynamical energies associated with the premises and processes of virtually all of our religious and spiritual paradigms directly undermine or pathologize the ego as the impediment to religious or spiritual evolution? What if they are not applicable in this age? What if ego is not a noun, but a verb? What if it is not ego that impedes consciousness evolution as virtually all religions and spiritual systems teach, but an unhealthy and inauthentic ego that does?
And what if we are now in an egoic stage of consciousness evolution, one in which the task is to integrate a healthy real ego into our spiritual journey, not transcend it or marginalize it, which would make the energetic dynamisms of our past paradigms as obsolete as they made the paradigms they replaced obsolete? What if this new stage of our evolution requires an entirely new spiritual paradigm that redefines the nature of self, goodness, love, God, and enlightenment?
Bridging from theory to the personal, to be human is to need a paradigm of life. We are not born with one automatically: we acquire it through the conditioning of our experience, first by our family-of-origin's paradigm of life, and then later by the many hundreds of paradigms available to us, represented by every spiritual product or service, no matter how esoteric. Every psychology, philosophy, religion, or spiritual teaching is also governed by a specific paradigm of how reality is perceived by human consciousness, and those overall paradigms context the way the family paradigm forms in the consciousness of parents and then distills down through to children.
A paradigm is thus a lens through which all human beings experience experience, the orienting operating system, consciousness navigation, and processing organ of your life. All paradigms consists of five elements: 1) a cosmology, the architecture of Reality according to that paradigm; 2) a cosmogony, how the cosmology came to be in the first place; 3) the cause of human suffering explained by the cosmology and the cosmogony; 4) the way to heal human suffering, explained by the cause; and 5) the state of consciousness ultimacy or goal at the end of human suffering.
Woven within these 5 elements are three sub-elements: 1) a basic value system defining what in the human condition is good and what is not good; 2) a set of ethical standards of behavior that express the basic value system; and 3) a specific moral system that adjudicates how the ethics and value systems play out in everyday human life.
The paradigm you have been conditioned to live by thus holds all these elements and sub-elements, even if you are not conscious of their specific nature and character. As such, it underlies who you are in some very real ways and sets why and how you act and react to life in all of its domains. It also unavoidably acts as a filter that will screen out certain aspects of life based on what the paradigm holds as valuable and not, good or not good, and real or not real.
In other words, the values it imparts to you and the degree you grip those values will then unavoidably close off access to many other estates of being, expression, and consciousness deemed 'wrong,' not real, or not desirable according to its overall picture of human life.
Only a tiny minority of human beings ‘see’ paradigms, much less think paradigmatically, no matter how much spiritual searching they have done. Most people are only dimly aware of why they believe in what they believe and why they don’t believe what they don’t, never realizing that their conscious beliefs are only blossoms on the bush of an unconscious overall value system, and that that value system is itself dependent upon, and arises within, a specific root-paradigm or picture of human life.
In a more general way, arguably the most profound tragedy of the human race is that we are in denial about how deeply we need, self-define, and constantly live within paradigms. Every thought you have, every choice you make, every reality you try to manifest, is part of your paradigm of life. But in all of our psychological, religious, spiritual, philosophical, social, or educational attempts to create more personal and universal harmony in this fractious world, there has been virtually no conversation about the nature of paradigms. The current catchphrase should not be ‘clash of civilizations;’ it is actually one step deeper: a ‘clash of paradigms.’ How we give our paradigms the power to define and express us invisibly, and thus govern all of the value systems that collide every day on a global scale, is the only solutional path of inquiry.
Instead we impotently try to build bridges between conflicting factions or viewpoints while remaining within the very paradigms that are at true cause for the conflict. In that way, we can only address the content effects and not the true causal contexts of our conflicts, patchwork our differences symptomatically and not resolve them causally, and justify such impotent effort with catch-phrases like ’cultural diversity, ’religious freedom,’ or ‘philosophical differences.’
This is why no true resolution of our differences as human beings has ever occurred in all of our history and will never occur while in this frame. All such shortsighted attempts only utilize the content within a paradigm as the focus of interest, instead of the context of the paradigm that governs the content, and thus ignore the true causal ground for lasting change. Every individual or collective conflict of human beings, without exception, is a collision of paradigms, because it is our paradigms that underlie all of our value systems that view the universe differently and so result in the tension and conflict we know as a species.
So without knowing exactly and specifically why and how your paradigm of life and its associated value systems chooses your life experience for you, your most real and authentic version of you will have no opportunity to go ‘meta-‘ to it and thus will necessarily remain within the closed cell of its picture of life. How could you expect to ever encounter anything of essential nature about Divine Being while you possess such a powerful filter of reality itself, and are unconscious that that filter is there between you and life, creating your experience of life?
In that sense, you can’t consciously choose something of which you are not clearly conscious. So if you are not consciously aware of the nature and complexity of your current paradigm, how and why it contexts your value system, and how and why your value system contexts your beliefs, actions, and reactions in life, there is no space to actually choose your paradigm.
As such, your unconscious paradigm has been so thoroughly and unknowingly conditioned into you, that it will, by default, author on an average of 70% of all your actions and reactions in life. It is this, that which you call your life, that you will mistakenly experience as being authored by you, when it is actually your paradigm authoring you in majority degree.
So the paradigm of life imparted by your family, culture, religion, philosophy, or spirituality, is you to that percentage until the real you shows up deeply enough to begin to de-condition yourself from it cleanly enough to then be able to consciously choose it or not. Additionally, in the absence of being able to see and know paradigms and their effect in your life, you will also unavoidably be compelled to hold too tightly onto your beliefs and literally define yourself through them.
When you are thus unaware of the true nature of your paradigm of life, you will overgrip your beliefs to define you, and your paradigm of life will act as a powerful filter mechanism which screens out whole estates of being, consciousness, and thus experience that is foreign to it. When we are blind or in denial to the true nature of our paradigm and its value systems of our life, how it imparts the sensation that it is we and not it that is ‘us,’ and the addictive relation we have to it, we are then literally not aware of what we are not aware of. This not knowing what we do not know will inevitably close us to real change because we don’t realize another experience of experience is even possible.
Another way to say this is that without the ability to go ‘meta-‘ or contextual to your paradigm of life, and see it from ‘above,’ you will thus ‘fuse’ to it, that is, overgrip it to define yourself, and then think that your particular truth about something is not just ‘a’ truth, but ‘the’ truth. This is how closed, arrogant, fundamentalist ‘we are right and everyone else is wrong’ dynamics are born and express in our world and wreak such havoc.
That havoc can be externally obvious with all the militant religious violence of our past and present, or subtly expressed as in what is generally regarded as gentle Buddhism, where so many teachers proclaim the Nondual as the Final Wisdom or Root-Being that explains everything in all ways because it is ‘above’ all dualistic philosophies and theories. This renders all dualistically-oriented philosophies or mental body-based paradigms unenlightened and doomed to continue to involve suffering, for two reasons: one, that you will overidentify and overrattach to your dualistic-based viewpoint of life to create an illusional sense of selfhood, and two, because the dualistic paradigm you cling to will always be an unnatural ‘thing’ keeping you separated from the Essentialness of life.
It is in this way that Buddhism maintains it is ‘above’ mental body-based paradigm-ism altogether and thus possesses the way to ‘the’ truth, not just a way to ‘a’ truth, which then inevitably closes its adherents to other truths or paradigms that conflict with their truths. So Buddhism claims the only answer to rid yourself of this powerful mental body-based filter that sits between you and life is to get enlightened, which indeed will put you ‘meta-‘ to all paradigms in some very powerful ways, except for the paradigm taught by Buddhism.
Why has no one noticed for 2500 years that Buddhism teaches transcendence of all paradigms except its own, the one that is imparted by enlightenment, the one you live through afterward, which although hugely changed, is still dualistically-mediated?
Even if a paradigm claims not to be a paradigm, as Buddhism so often does, it is still a paradigm, just one that claims to not be a paradigm. We cannot ever escape the necessity of paradigm, even if we become enlightened. Despite the fact that during the few moments or minutes of satori as access to the Nondual Aspect of Divine Being is gained, we lose all paradigm lenses and filters as we reboot the dualistically-oriented mental body, after enlightenment, we simply experience the universe through a different, far less dualistically dense, more enlightened paradigmatic lens.
Even that less dualistically dense lens is still a paradigm that at the same time it expands reality, it also filters reality in certain very specific ways, rejecting all other truths that don’t conform to what it maintains as ‘the’ truth that Nonduality is Root-Being, and that there is nothing intrinsically real about individual selfhood.
In these ways, it is never taught that even a Nondual-based enlightened paradigm still filters reality. This is why enlightened teachers past and present have so much emotional dystrophy in the personal lives that remains after enlightenment. There is a huge estate of suffering that still remains beneath the conscious awareness of the enlightened person that is never touched by the enlightenment. In that way Buddhism teaches only conscious suffering matters: unconscious suffering doesn’t matter because it is unconscious, and supposedly then not affecting your enlightenment.
That such dystrophy in enlightened teachers is so often written off as idiosyncratic or ‘beyond’ criticism because of the enlightenment of the person expressing it, is one of the profound tragedies of the gross overestimation of the effects of Buddhistic enlightenment and how deeply Buddhism undercuts the heart of our humanity. That it claims to liberate the true heart of our humanity, is an even deeper scar on the soul of our species.
The paradigm offered in this work teaches that you need to cleanse and heal your present human-based paradigm of its distortive elements that have hooked an emotionally immature aspect of you into defining life in certain ways that keep your authentic selfhood hidden, not just transcend it. While your authentic selfhood remains hidden by your slavish addiction to your hidden wound-based paradigm of life, you will only then experience distortive or limiting elements in your spiritual life to the same degree, even if, and especially if, you are enlightened in the Buddhistic tradition.
In all these ways, you are invited to realize that you have been conditioned by your family, your religion, your society, and your culture to have an overall paradigm of human life that governs the entire vista of your experience. It is this first personal paradigm imparted to you primarily by your family-of-origin, and secondarily within the family of your culture-of-origin, and religion-of-origin, which is the actual causal ground for how you act and react to all things.
It is fusion to one’s paradigm of life, east or west, with no examination of the possible limits or errors possessed within it, and one’s subsequent neurotic over-grip of it to define oneself through the false belief that you possess ‘the’ truth rather than ‘a’ truth, that is the root of virtually all of our inner and outer conflict in planet earth, past, present, and future.
It does this so seamlessly that you are not even aware of it and so never realize that your milk-paradigm, and not your most authentic you, has been living your life by programming you within its emotional wound-based value systems. Your milk-paradigm is the actual causal basis for the suffering you wish to mitigate by investigating other paradigms that claim to be effective in that domain.
So because most people never inventory the true nature of their personal milk-paradigm and differentiate from it before seeking relief in other more spiritual paradigms, especially those of the east that promise permanent transcendence of suffering through enlightenment, there is a disastrous, inevitable result that the conscious and unconscious elements of the milk-paradigm you start with on your path of spiritual seeking will attach themselves to your new path and inevitably pollute and distort any other paradigm of life you seek for deliverance, even after you are enlightened.
Your own personal paradigm must first be cleared and healed of its paradigmatic distortions and errors, and then differentiated from the false version of selfhood it imparts to you, before ever embarking on a new paradigm of life. That such a depthful process has never been taught as specifically necessary by any spiritual teacher or teaching past or present, speaks to the limits and distortions of all of our past teachers and teachings.
It is not enough to teach ‘you have to be a somebody before you become a nobody.’ The issue is: what is the true and most authentic nature of that ‘somebody?’ This kind of clearing and differentiation from your milk-paradigm is impossible if you utilize a definition of ‘somebodyness’ or selfhood benchmarked by mere Maslowian functionalities, as so many so-called integrative paths maintain.
As such, this is something no past or current psychology or psychospiritual paradigm can help you find, because the founders of those paradigms never found their own authentic selves through either the realization of the structure or primacy of the human emotional body over the mental, and then utilize those truths to de-condition from the paradigm that defined them before they set out to offer their own solution paths. Despite what is taught, de-conditioning from your original milk-paradigm cannot be done by either insight or transcendence: it must he healed so that it molts from the heart and soul of you.
The most poisonous example of the effect of the lack of a teacher’s true emotionally mature authentic self before they set out on an enlightenment path is when it is taught that one’s authentic self is only revealed through Buddhistic enlightenment. In other words, the form of diaphanous selfhood that arises post-enlightenment is defined by a popular current paradigm as the truest form of one’s authentic self, because of how freed up of attachments and identifications it has become.
But that so-called ‘authentic’ self arose through transcendence of attachments and identifications, not a healing of those elements, using the familiar experience of life that a ‘thing becomes smaller the farther away it is.’ If you thus gain meditative ‘farther’ perspective on your suffering, it will get smaller and smaller and affect your life less and less percentage-wise. But just because a thing appears to be smaller when it is farther away, the actual ‘size’ or ‘mass’ of the thing always remains the same: only your particular view of it shifts, not its actuality.
In that way, transcendence, the time-honored benchmark algorithm of virtually all eastern teaching, has always been a cowardly flight from our suffering, because Buddhism never looks to address and heal the causes of our suffering, only its effects, as those effects arise in consciousness moment-to-moment. Since Buddhism teaches we can never know Cause, it only ‘sees’ and operates at the effect level of human activity.
Doing so allows it to justify leaving causal analyses to psychology or philosophy for those who still are so unenlightened they need to dally in such dualistic domains until they are ready to finally ‘get’ it. And ‘getting it’ means to stop slaving away at the ongoing and endless self-satisfaction project we are so conditioned to hold onto as an anchor to give us a false sense of a self that has no intrinsic reality of its own.
It is time for this arrogant Buddhistic poison to be thrown in the trash heap of history as a misbegotten attempt to create pseudo-nirvanic states of consciousness, claiming it is The Final Wisdom. At best, it was both a first stab at psychology and also can lead us to one-third of the estate of true Divine Being. But there is a terrible price one pays for what it does get right: its mistaken truth that it offers access to the Root of Divine Being rather than only one-third of It; how it defines the personal self as unreal; and how it teaches us to transcend the effects of suffering rather than heal the causes.
All of these distortions have cut the heart of humankind in half, top to bottom, prohibiting full and healthy activation of the bottom three chakras, preventing that altogether after enlightenment, and have created untold countless bardo-like loops of existential suffering over the millennia masked by the enlightenment it promises.
The true authentic self must be manifested before enlightenment, something no current psychology can create because of the huge blind spots those paradigms have about emotions while lacking any true standard for emotional maturity. Neither can any Maslowian attainment of self-functionality ever create the emotional maturity of the true authentic self.
There is now a way that redefines the nature of the authentic self through the primacy of the human emotional body over the mental and physical bodies, and heals most of the suffering due to the attachments and identifications without transcendence or hindered by the limits in psychology and psychiatry. The true emotionally mature authentic self manifested through such healing is then and only then qualified to actively move consciousness past dualisms to non-dualisms, unalisms, and Essential Root-Being.
As said, almost no one is ever aware of all the unconscious ways they have been conditioned, and almost no one has lived a self-examined life deeply enough to say they have consciously chosen all the elements of their paradigms. You can thus only consciously choose the value systems that you have exhaustively examined for consistency and non-contradictoriness; tested as cogent in all domains of human life; embraced deeply enough to make the testing real; and embodied consciously as a self-chosen path of life. This requires a deeply contemplative and self-examined life.
What percentage of the population of planet earth qualifies for that kind of life? The degree of that percentage now and in our history is the degree we as a species have never and will never embody mature spirituality beyond mere attainment of states, take our destinies in our hands, and instead stumble from the present into the future veering unsteadily and crashing into ourselves and each other as we always have done. As such, we have a world of smoldering tensions ready to break out in open conflict at any moment, in the range between individual relatedness all the way out to country-to-country dynamics.
In another direction, at this stage of our evolution of consciousness, none of our available societal, philosophical, psychological, spiritual, or religious paradigms are original, in the sense that they offer an entirely new way of looking at human experience. Virtually all paradigms available today represent a hybridization of many past paradigms mixed together, most notable those who sell themselves as some integration of eastern and western teachings so wildly popular these days.
That is what passes as evolution in this domain: attempts to synthesize past paradigms in patchwork fashion in the name of integration, rather than offer a fresh new take on how consciousness imparts our reality to us. These syntheses, by definition, are synthetic or syncretic, not metaphysically original or natural. A true paradigm shift is a rare event: Socrates, Lao-Tzu, Gotama, and the real Yeshua, not the biblical version, all offered seminal new ways of how human consciousness interlaces with what we call human experience and relates to the overall spiritual context for our human lives: you can agree or disagree with them, but they were not synthetic.
These original paradigms changed the world, and were fiercely resisted by the prevailing paradigms of their day when they were first offered. This happens because human beings self-define through the non-examination of their paradigms through blind attachment to them via their beliefs and projections. The introduction of a truly new non-syncretic paradigm of human life will always threaten the very underpinnings of those unconsciously fused in paradigmatic self-definition, and sources the militant resistance to the change imparted by its offering.
The state of our world at this stage of our evolution cries desperately for just such a shift imparted by a fresh, original non-syncretic paradigm. The simple or complex rehash and synthesis of past paradigms is mere academia at best, and at worst only modern teachers riding on the shoulders of the great souls of the past, believing they are offering something new, when all they have done is re-arranged the metaphysics of the founder or haphazardly combined dharmic paths of several paradigms without regard to the reductionisms and impurities they impart to their patchwork modern product. These modern products are then marketed to a spiritually hungry world not conditioned to be aware of the distorting effects of such inappropriate mixing.
Theohumanity is offered as just such an original, non-hybridized paradigm of human life and consciousness, one seminal element of which is that until and unless your current paradigm of life is de-conditioned deeply and productively enough to reveal the actual emotionally mature authentic self beneath it that will by default remain hidden, no real spiritual clarity or embodiment is possible. This occurs because without the presence of your de-conditioned authentic self, the search for the experience or embodiment of Divine Being will be done by the inauthentic vehicle of one’s unexamined paradigm and value systems of life taking the place of the true and real self of your personhood.
In addition, you have also been conditioned to believe it is impossible that there could ever be a meta-cultural, meta-religious, meta-philosophical picture of human life and standard of human consciousness maturity that applied equally to all people, of all cultures, for all times, without exception. Such a universally applicable paradigm would have the effect of reframing every one of our historical value systems, east and west, modern and traditional, philosophical, religious, spiritual, psychological, and cultural, to a new universal standard or benchmark of human consciousness maturity.
Such a benchmark would apply equally to atheist, scientist, mystic, drug abuser, Muslim, Jew, Christian, criminal, Catholic, Buddhist, moralist, or aborigine, and every other category of human ethnic group, religion, culture, or value system, challenging each to see how their sub-paradigm distorts or screens out basic aspects of the human condition. It would do this by imparting an overall meta-contextual ‘umbrella’ paradigm that honored all the truths in all our disparate systems of morality, philosophy, and ethics, but challenged their distortions.
Virtually all scholars in sociology, cultural anthropology, ethnology, philosophy, theology, or related fields deny such a universal human paradigm is possible. This position is held because experts and scholars are themselves conditioned to not be able to see past the distortions about diversity they hold, and also how they don’t track that just because a religious, philosophical, spiritual, or cultural paradigm is centuries old and its customs and value systems held by millions, does not mean it is representative of human maturity as our consciousness as a species has evolved over time.
More tragically, this possibility is also rejected by the same scholars and experts because of the obviousness that people in all these disparate groupings would refuse to give up their specific pictures of God or lack thereof, human life, and the value systems associated with them. But that is like saying that because the vast majority of the people of the time refused to believe the earth moved around the sun, it would be inappropriate to offer that truth. But despite our species’ desire to remain in pre-egoic collectivistic consciousness stasis and over-grip the traditional paradigms and value systems based in that stage, history has proven that real truth does not negotiate with people’s barbarisms, beliefs, or biases.
Why is that truth obvious for domains of so-called scientific truth, but not in domains of religious and cultural value systems? If an overall truth in physics applies equally to all people whether they believe in it or not, why is this not possible in metaphysics? Before such a possibility becomes a topic of inquiry and debate, its possibility must be accepted. Without that possibility, we are doomed to be paradigmatically both fractious and contentious in the name of diversity, murderous and vengeful in the name of religious purity, or bellicose and stubborn in the name of freedom of choice.
Many believe Transpersonal Psychology or Integral Paths offer such a meta-picture or universalized paradigm. But neither of these qualify because they are based both on a traditional ‘perennial philosophy’ model based in a Buddhist picture of human consciousness ultimacy that has been offered for almost 2500 years. As said, such models are simply a reworking or synthesis of existing pre-egoic paradigms, including what they call the ‘ego stages’ of the west. As such they can’t represent any true shift, only a re-working of what already is held as ‘true.’
Here we speak of a radical departure from all models based in the past to one that redefines why all of our previous models have offered what they have offered based on the earlier versions of consciousness maturity and enlightenment that are no longer sufficient as we have evolved over time.
Theohumanity is just such an original non-hybridized universal paradigm, because its five paradigmatic parameters of cosmogony, cosmology, cause of human suffering, dharma to heal the cause of suffering, and definition of ultimacy of human consciousness, are radically different than any other paradigm ever offered. It does this by enfolding all of our previous paradigms into a new whole that is not a synthesis of the past, but a reframing of the historical narrative of our understanding of human consciousness and how it evolves and how it is impeded from evolving, according to the original blueprint of human consciousness and its movements through the ethers.
It accomplishes this by being based upon the human emotional body, a heretofore invisible primary and permanently structural attribute of human consciousness upstream of our mental and physical bodies unseen as such by all other psychological, philosophical, religious, and spiritual paradigms in our history. No past or present paradigm in our history has ever seen through to this primariness and how the human emotional body has always invisibly governed why we believe what we believe, why we design our gods the ways we have, and why we have designed our past paradigms and value systems the way we have.
As such, mining the hidden and almost wholly unconscious lodes of dystrophic emotional landscapes in all of us will elucidate how all of our conscious opinions, positions, choices, and expectations of outcomes in all arenas of human intercourse, and thus the actual causes of why all of our conscious interactions are so problematically imbued, are invisibly configured by these unconscious emotional dystrophies. It also confronts how the now only possible visibility of the architecture and functions of the emotional body challenges all former models of enlightenment offered by Buddhism and Hinduism for the past 5000 years.
The elucidation of these truths is consensually validatable in personal experience by going deeply into what this paradigm offers. We think, evaluate, worship, enlighten, and act according to how our unconscious emotional landscapes dictate we should, and as a species we have not known this in any effective way as this truth has been screened out to us by our conditioned paradigms of the human historical narrative. No psychological, religious, spiritual, or philosophical paradigm we have ever invented has known this.
Also, despite the many hundreds of paradigmatic choices available to human beings, very few people ever commit fully to any one path or paradigm, believing in the modern new age cafeteria pick-and-choose dynamic of elements from many paradigms as evidence of their individuality, eclecticism, clarity, open-mindedness, and ‘freedom.’
This is always teenage level spirituality, because such seekers have no consciousness about how they never create an overall paradigm within which all of their pick-and-choose elements of spiritual consumerism are contexted. This is always cowardice at worst and ignorance at best, based in a muddled mess that never delivers to the immature consciousness duped by it the kind of healing or deliverance they seek, which most people will never realize until after they die and then realize their error.
This happens because without a clear, non-contradictory, and concisive paradigm within which their dharmic elements are contexted, the elements have no contextual ‘glue’ bringing them together into energetic coherency, and so will manifest wildly different kinds of outcomes as they collide with other elements that are not resonant in content or context, lacking an overarching energetic ground altogether.
This lack of clear paradigmatic context with cafeteria-style spiritual consumerism will thus always entangle one in energies that will always subvert the otherwise good intention of the seeker. That this kind of meta-teaching truth is almost never taught to consumers of psychospiritual content, because so few teachers, east or west, enlightened or not, ever track or even understand it, is a profound tragedy for our species.
As a corollary issue, paradigmatic purity is seen as the slavish cause of most of our problems, when people are closed to other viewpoints and hold only to their own: in the worst case, ‘kill the infidel,’ that is, murder those who don’t agree with the ideology of your paradigm to which you are fused. A loosening of one’s grip on their point-of-view and a call to a diversity of paradigmatic elements is thus seen as the solution.
But what if our problems are not caused by being slave to paradigmatic purity as it seems, but instead because all of our paradigms in history are either incomplete or in outright error as to the real nature of human beings? If that were true, then the over-gripping to paradigmatic purity actually causes those errors to emerge for our consideration, a good thing in itself, and that the real problem of paradigm content-error thus goes undiagnosed?
The diagnosis that it is the attachment to any ideology or paradigm that was wrong, and diversity as the answer, would thus be in deep error, and that the true source of all our challenges as human beings is because the actual limited and error-filledcontent of our modern and traditional paradigms is the real problem.
But then the question becomes, who dares to call out all of our paradigms available to us from history as being in outright error or incomplete? Only a mad man, most would say. But what if that possible truth was based on a consensually validatable experience that occurs as our myopia about emotions was finally and for the first time corrected by the lenses of such a paradigm? That it was not yet time in our past even for our former creators of original paradigms to be ready to face into the true nature of emotions?
And that the world could then finally ‘see’ how the presence and structure of the human emotional body, and how its primacy over the mental and physical bodies illuminates all the errors in all of our paradigms created by its prior invisibility to those very paradigms? Because all of our paradigms in history believe it is either the mental body or the physical body that is upstream or more primary than the emotional body?
If these were possibly true, we would have a new world, a new heart of humankind, and a new future, one in which all of the true roots of our symptoms of chaos and suffering that have been heretofore unconscious to us as individuals and as a species would emerge for new paths of solution and expression.
This is not just another misbegotten call to a shangri-la, utopia, eden or ideal society as has been put out in the past by visionaries with no grounding in the heart of the human. It would be an entirely new way for all of us to look at ourselves first as part of the problem facing us as a species. It would not ever be ‘ideal:’ it would just be real, and as real it would point us to new ways of looking at our challenges.
And lastly, even more tragic is how rare it is to ever encounter anyone, teacher or seeker, enlightened or not, who never track how deep and existential wounding in childhood unconsciously directs them to specific forms of spiritual products and services. Without a paradigm that can context such direction and offer healing for them in ways even sophisticated psychological models simply cannot reach, the actual attainment of higher or deeper states of consciousness actually seals out access to those wounds.
How many people track that their attraction to an enlightened teacher with whom they can have no personal connection because the paradigm teaches there is no real self in either to link, can only happen if they have been conditioned by parents with whom they had no energetic or emotional connect? How a child that did have such a vital connect with their parents wouldnever be drawn to such energetically absent non-dualized teachers with crippled chakras 1, 2, and 3, no matter how wise or full of shakti they were? And in the teacher, beneath all the shakti and Sunyata are the unconscious wounds never touched by enlightenment responsible for all the ongoing emotional dystrophies and overtly inappropriate behaviors so rampant in enlightened teachers, especially in the sexual domain.
It is far overdue for this kind of meta-paradigmatic understanding that both unifies all the dharmic elements of one’s work and tracks subtle contributions of how unhealed existential wounds of consciousness are medicated by our attainments, to no longer be encountered as a rare esoteric insight. It is time for this to be taught as a basic foundational truth in all consciousness growth domains, perhaps within a field called ‘Meta-contextual paradigmatics.’
This issue is not just a case of abstract intellectual curiosity or notional cognitive reverie: it represents a real truth about how we utilize our choice mechanism of life within the necessary value systems we all must adopt consciously and cohesively, or by default fall prey to conditioned states to which we are in ignorance and denial, within which we will remain, and from which we are led further from, and not closer to, our goals of consciousness maturation.
Until our choice mechanisms are grounded as such, we as a species will continue to cycle in revolutionary temporary pseudo-solutions in consciousness growth domains that endlessly circle in polarized positions depending on the historical era, rather than opening up to resolutionary truths that actually vertically transmute consciousness in essence, and not just re-clothe it into new forms that ceaselessly shift in conditioned responses to our unconscious fears.
It is upon the rock of this new meta-paradigmatic foundation that my own commitment to our common future is dedicated.
daniel barron