I’ve noticed lately that I really haven’t had much to write about it. Part of it I think is because I’ve been quite busy with other projects, but I think the bigger reason is that many of my fundamental assumptions about the way reality works have come into question. I’ve found that it’s kind of difficult to write things when I’m beginning to question the very way that I had been approaching almost everything. With that in mind I figured I’d share a little bit of what that process has been like.
I couple months ago I began engaging in Robert Kegan’s1 Immunity to Change process, which is designed to unearth hidden “core assumptions” related to one’s current “order of consciousness” (a fancy way of saying “development”). Once these core assumptions are surfaced one begins a process of testing these assumptions, first with small tests and then with larger ones. The tests are meant to reveal data about whether or not those assumptions are true. And if they aren’t, then they allow one to loosen their grip on said assumptions.
In my own case, I unearthed several very interested assumptions. Some of them I was already starting to become aware of, and so wasn’t that surprised by—though I will say that seeing them in writing for the first time did kind of surprise me. But there was one in particular that really knocked me over. And it was that, “I should be able to resolve all paradoxes and contradictions that I encounter.”
For at least a few years now, I’ve had it as one of my main aims to take in as much information as possible. The information itself comes not only from reading or taking in other media, but also from direct experience: from interesting discussions, and from all sorts of practices (psychological, spiritual, and otherwise). As a result I’ve “learned” more and more and have really built up quite a robust model about the way things are. I always considered that this model was dynamically evolving, and that by running into paradoxes and contradictions I’d be able to learn from them and integrate (or perhaps a better word would be “assimilate”) them into this constantly growing model. When I tell many of my closest friends this (hey guys!) they say, “Oh, yeah that makes perfect sense buddy.”
Then I tell them that, as a result of unearthing this assumption, I’m now starting to question this entire approach. Should I really be able to resolve (or integrate) all of these disparate pieces of information? Often their interest is piqued, and I think like me, they begin to question (perhaps for the first time) this approach to reality. I haven’t completely finished with this process, and I still have much difficult work to do, to see where it leads. But for the first time, I’ve started to see that resolving paradox and creating an ever-evolving model of reality might not be the best (or at least only reasonable) approach to reality.
I don’t know is, but I am committed to following this thread of inquiry and to do my best to see where Kegan’s method takes me. I have a feeling it’s going somewhere important, if only because I see some of my deepest held assumptions crumbling down around me. It isn’t pleasant, and it isn’t winning me any friends at the moment, but what else can I do?
- For those of you who don’t know about Robert Kegan, he is a developmental psychologist at Harvard university who has been studying adult development for over two decades. His last book, In Over Our Heads: The Mental Demands of Modern Life is a great introduction to his developmental theory. [↩]
May 6th, 2009 at 7:44 am
Your account of Kegan reminds me strongly of the work of Pierre Grimes – as I’m sure will have been pointed out to you recently by a mutual friend…
Would you agree, that the way that Emptiness manifests in experience is precisely as a profound sense of paradox? You’ve made me wonder whether I used to – or to some extent may *still* – believe that this paradox too is ‘resolvable’… I can see what you mean about the assumption that paradoxes can be resolved is an impediment to progress!
May 6th, 2009 at 8:17 am
Hey Duncan,
Yeah, Alan mentioned the interesting similarities or parallels between my description of Kegan’s work and of Grimes. It definitely made me interested in looking into Grimes work.
Yes, I would say that I’m seeing paradox everywhere, both in my spiritual practice and in other ways. Emptiness itself, does present an interesting “problem,” at least I think when it’s seen as being opposed to something else (non-emptiness). I think that’s a major paradox of a certain part of practice, the resolution of which, I guess, is 4th path. So many paradoxes!
May 6th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
Thanks for sharing some of your process with the world, V. Talking with you has really helped me and I’m looking forward to doing the process.
Oh, and paradox has definitely been at the forefront of my life recently, so it seems there might something to that and this process (or the order’s). Either way, good stuff.
May 7th, 2009 at 6:42 am
The testing of assumptions sounds similar to “The Work” by Byron Katie. A friend of mine raves on about it, so much so that even though he’s been meditating for over a decade he now thinks ‘the work’ brings him closer to the nature of things than meditation. Another tool I’ve personally found useful is E-Prime, which helps bring nebulous truths (“the movie was good”) back down to sense experience (“I liked the movie”), and thus help with conflict resolution.
Duncan> I think (but not realise) that Emptiness and Manifestion are in a sense opposites. In the illusory state we take sense experience to imply a self and various other things, the realisation of the emptiness of all things, IMH_O_, shows us that nothing implies anything. An intellectual treatment of the same can be found in ‘What the Tortoise Said to Achilles’ by Lewis Carroll.
May 7th, 2009 at 11:28 am
Hi Stacy,
Thanks for the comment and for drawing parallels to other systems. I don’t know how they are related to Immunity to Change, as I haven’t done “The Work” or “E-Prime.” But they sound interesting.
With regards to your opinion that Emptiness and Manifestation are opposites, I would strongly suggest that you might want to realize that first before making the argument with anyone here. I say that because there are a lot of strong practitioners (Duncan included) who have realized for themselves that Emptiness and Form are intimately connected…
Best,
-Vince
May 8th, 2009 at 8:58 am
I have no desire to argue with anyone (debate perhaps), and I was careful to prefix my comment with ‘I Think’ and ‘IMHO’ to lighten my comment.
I have not had any experiences I would call realisations (permanent shifts of perception / identity) but have had the occasional meditative experience of a dropping away (or significant reduction) of the implications the normally seem to self evidently follow from sense experience, I had thought to tentatively label this ‘emptiness’, the Heart Sutra says: go deeper.
I agree that it’s largely pointless to philosophize about insight and enlightenment without practising to realise the same, I have been trying to do the latter for 15 years, but no such luck yet. I’ve shifted gears recently to Vipasanna so maybe that will yield something worthwhile.
June 25th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
It is helpful to work with traditional models/ideologies/philosophies in this way, and it may also be helpful to include (apparently) more mundane core beliefs such as “my wife should do her dishes” or “my neighbor’s dog shouldn’t bark”…!
When taken as true, stories tend to have the same effect, no matter their content. They create an identification with a viewpoint, with content of experience, and so also creates the appearance of an I with an other and all that goes with it. (Variations of stuckness and unease.)