Tags
Evolutioanry Nonduality and Ralph Waldo Emerson
Evolutionary Nonduality, at least as it is taught by Andrew Cohen, is ultimately about recognizing that we are not separate from the entire process of cosmic evolution. We tend to relate to the idea of evolution as if we are a thing – a separate object – that exists within an evolving process, something like a piece of wood floating in a running river. When we experience an evolutionary nondual awakening we recognize that our experience of “being human” is not only an experience that we are having as a separate entity. It is an experience that the universe is having through us through our separate-entity-ness. This is direct recognition that you do not only exist in an evolutionary process – the evolutionary process is who you are! You are that process and your experience of being “a person” who has a “name” and a “personal history” is not only the experience that “you” are having – it is the experience that the universe is having right now through you.
From one perspective an experience of evolutionary nonduality means that a human being is waking up to the fact that it is not just a separate entity, but an expression of the process of evolution itself. From another perspective – an even more nondual perspective – an experience of evolutionary nonduality means that the universe itself is waking up to the fact of its own existence and realizing that it had mistaken itself for a human being.
This understanding, as you can see, is far from our normal conception of reality – in fact it might sound absurd. I would contend that this is because we are deeply habituated to seeing ourselves as separate entities that exist within a variety of background contexts – a culture, a world, a universe. This sense of separation is maintained though a constant activity of personalizing our experience. We habitually define ourselves as separate from some background and in so doing we develop a solid sense of being a “something” that exists over, against and separate from everything else. Traditionally enlightenment has always involved the disillusion of the boundary between self and other, self and world, self and universe. When this habit of separation falls away we see the truth of nonduality, the truth that there is no boundary, that all is one and that we are that.
As I see it there are precursors to the experience of evolutionary nonduality in classical American philosophy. Perhaps the first of these precursors are Ralph Waldo Emerson’s beautiful descriptions of his own experiences of oneness with nature. In a journal entry written on April 11, 1834, Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote a few lines to describe an experience that I would easily place in the general category of non-duality at least in the sense of a breaking down of the boundary that separates our human experience from nature. The concluding lines of that journal entry read as follows.
“I saw only the noble earth on which I was born, with the great Star which warms and enlightens it. I saw the clouds that hang their significant drapery over us. It was Day— that was all Heaven said.”
In the larger journal entry of which these lines are a part, Emerson described an experience of Oneness with nature that he had one afternoon while walking through the Mount Auburn Cemetery in Cambridge, Massachusetts. This experience is considered to be a defining moment in Emerson’s life. The concluding line for me is a non-dual declaration of reality. “It was Day – that was all that Heaven said.”
As I picture Emerson on that day, I imagine him transfixed in recognition of the explosion of life that he saw all around him. Emerson also saw that the deep emotional surge of exuberance that burst inside himself in spontaneous response to the beauty around him was as much a part of that day as anything else. There was only one thing happening – and it was day! Emerson’s teaching rested on this recognition that the deepest part of our “human nature” was completely inseparable from all of nature. Nature to Emerson was not something that happened outside, but was the continuous bursting forth of life into being that included everything. In other words, there is only one thing happening.
Emerson’s first book was called Nature and it was published in 1836. The first Chapter of that book includes what may be Emerson’s most often quoted description of non-dual awakening.
In the woods, we return to reason and faith. There I feel that nothing can befall me in life, — no disgrace, no calamity, (leaving me my eyes,) which nature cannot repair. Standing on the bare ground, — my head bathed by the blithe air, and uplifted into infinite space, — all mean egotism vanishes. I become a transparent eye-ball; I am nothing; I see all; the currents of the Universal Being circulate through me; I am part or particle of God.
In this quote Emerson is making a very clear reference to the experience of the disappearance of the separate sense of self. His “transparent eyeball” metaphorically communicates the experience of pure awareness after the sense of being someone has disappeared from consciousness. This realization of “no self” is often associated with Eastern thought, particularly the enlightenment experiences of Buddhism. Emerson loved Eastern spiritual philosophy and incorporated many of its conceptions into his own thinking and by doing so he helped to ensure that the experience of non-duality would play a prominent role in the development of the American mind.
Really beautiful, Jeff. Thanks!
Hi Stuart ( and bloggers in general),
The compliments are well and good but it really would be much more productive to other bloggers and to Jeff probably to have some kind of dialogue and not a non-sequiter.
To say why you feel Jeff’s comments are beautiful would be more interesting than just a compliment, IMO.
I do not agree with you Frank. Sometimes it is just enough to say it is beautiful or highly impressive, like this blog. It is quite a thing what Jeff is bringing up here. Cohen is really an expression of what he is teaching, every retreat he brings the teaching on a higher level.
I do not agree with you Frank. Sometimes it is just enough to say just that a blog is beautiful or amazing as this blog is. Most people respond to Jeff and that is fine. I had trouble with Andrew’s idea of non-duality but I found difference between eternal Being and Becoming is as old as philosophy itself. As far as I now understand it non-duality goes beyond both matter and mind (or includes both, the essence lies beyond it). As was clear in the discussion with Darryl (previous blog), one difference between old and new is discovery of evolution. In the old times the universe just was, there is prove now that the universe evolves, expands. So matter expands and mind expands.
An example of ‘beyond mind and matter’ would be Plato’s universal ideas. The way he describes the universal idea of beauty is as follows: the lover looks at beautiful bodies, he starts with one body and grows towards the idea of the beauty of all bodies. Than he sees that the beauty of soul is more worth, his love for beautiful souls -which means ideas to develop beauty in others- will become more important. So next step is that the lover becomes a lover of activities, action and laws, which he loves more that bodies. Than he will understand the beauty of knowledge -not only one example- but he looks at the sea of beauty, the love for wisdom. Than he comes to the goal of Love, that which ‘is’, it will not become smaller of greater, more beautiful or uglier, it doesn’t show itself as an idea or knowledge, it is not to be found in another thing, an animal or earth or heaven, but in itself, on itself and with itself it is forever a form in which all beautiful things share.
As far as I understand it, Plato’s idea of evolutionary enlightenment would be ‘getting closer and closer’ to the universal idea of beauty. Andrew’s idea is that the universal ideas (e.g. of beauty) evolve themselves. I think this is true because in Plato’s time the universe was static, he could never have had the idea of the immensity the universe as is proved now, and the expansion. In the end, our highest idea of beauty will be connected to the evolving universe which we are (something that also wasn’t known). And sooner or later we will connect to the concept of beauty of other life forms in this universe and that is so different that we are not able to even see it yet. In Plato’s time it where still the Gods who created the universe, something created at one point is static, something that came into existence can by dynamic, as is proved by now.
It is interesting to see that Buddha lived exactly at the same period as Plato (ca. 450-370 resp. 428-347 BC). Also in Buddhism there is an end-state, even though this teaching is different. I think it is very important to see every teaching is part of its time. I have been reading a history of philosophy that starts much earlier than the pre-Socrates that normally are seen as the first philosophers. Störing starts in India 1500 BC with the Veda’s which where seen as Divine Revelations. The thinking of the people than where not able to see the difference between animate and inanimate, between persons and things, between mental and physical. There gods where powers and elements of nature. Heaven, earth, fire, light etc. where seen as persons who are and act like human beings. The first philosophical question was: is there an primordial reality to all this that carries the world and from which the world was formed. This is the first moment that the gods are questioned. This is where the idea of the Unity of All starts. Than to 1000 BC sacrificial mysticism, the time when the caste system in India starts where Brahmans are privileged; they where the only ones who had the right rules to communicate with the Gods, which gave them immense power. According to them the smallest deviation of the ritual would cause severe damage in stead of grace. Criticism to this all came around 500 BC when individuals went to the woods to find deeper truths, this connected to the Upanishads which are about Brahman as the universal spirit and the Atman as the individual Self. Also this is secret and its wisdom will only be given to very close students. The general mood is very pessimistic and looking for immortality is important.
The reason why I write all this down is to show how much -like Platonism- Buddhism was a product of its time. And that the capacity of the human experience was so totally different that we cannot even imagine.
Sorry I have to continue a little longer. The next step was that Brahman as the universal spirit and the Atman as the individual Self where found to be one. That was the moment where ‘the relative world’ became unimportant. Again: 500 BC the human mind was not able to think in terms of evolution. That is the crucial difference: ‘In Atman one knows the entire universe’ and ‘Knowing the Self is knowing the entire world -letting go of all which connects to the mind. One of the reasons knowledge was said to be unimportant was because it was only accessible by the Brahmans. It was secret. If ‘Brahman’ was ‘Self’ there was nothing more to know. What was first secret, was now even accessible to the lowest casts. Buddha did not accept any cults. What he said about substance and coherence of the universe (Dharma’s) is that it exists of growth and decay of moments; nothing is permanent. Only the moment is real. Or: no substance, no duration, no bliss. The practical ethics that Buddha gave are quite equal to Christian ethics: do not kill, steal, lie, be impure.
The difference between what we can know that was not known 2500 years ago is exactly evolution. The idea of growth and decay connects to the ‘panta rhei’ -everything streams of Heraclitus, he also talked about opposites -life goes into death goes into life again. This thinking is cyclic -movement that goes back to the beginning again. While our knowledge now is so far that we know that over thousands of years strong elements of nature survive while weaker elements die out. So moments do not just follow each other, there is progress. There is progress in nature, in mind and in the cosmos. In India they live exactly like in the time of Buddha. If one ever visits a village where people almost live like animals, one gets an idea of what evolution is.
Sorry, I need to add: also the great Chinese Confucius was born in exactly the same time 551 BC. Amazing. If one looks at the idea of evolution it is clear that this was the time that great humans took over the position of the Gods.
The other great Chinese teacher Lao Tse was born at approx. the same time, 600 BC. Also the Tao says: when all beings and things move, I investigate how they move, yes, things grow and flower and each returns to its origin..
I must say: reading about Tao causes a state of meditation. who am I to know anything.
forget confucius.. buddha.. plato..
they were not on the same level as the Christ!! Jesus was the most enlightened man who ever lived.
In connection with this blog it is not so much about who is most enlightened. The fact that all these great people Confusius, Lao Tse, Buddha and Plato where born within a timespan of 50 years connects with me to the idea expressed in this blog that this is about ‘ an experience that the universe is having through us through our separate-entity-ness. ‘This is direct recognition that we do not only exist in an evolutionary process – the evolutionary process is we are!. It is clear that at a certain point in history there was an extreme hight of consciousness that was expressed through these individuals, within their respective cultures.
I agree with some of these posts regarding some of these people they did have a high state of consciousness. It seems nearly every race, culture or nation has a big history with some very clever people. So do you think this evolutionary process is world-wide? If so why do some races (such as the negro race) appear to be much backwards than other races according to evolution? Remember Darwin was a strong racist. Other pragmatist philosophers also held the view that certain races were superior than others. I can not comment on Mr Emerson on this he may of agreed or disagreed.
Just like it is not about who is most enlightened, it is not about who is most evolved. But I did think about other regions after reading today. I looked up the culture of the pre-Colombian Maya’s which has been very high and I read that all Maya documents where burned because they where seen as heathen. So we only know their art, not their wisdom.
I also know that the native Indians in America had extreme wisdom, even though it is not written down. I studied it for a while. I found on the Internet things that connect to the previous posts (cyclic thinking):
‘ You have noticed that everything an Indian does in a circle, and that is because the Power of the World always works in circles, and everything and everything tries to be round’.
Also I found a story that connects to Christianity:
An American Indian Legend – Nation Unknown
A wise woman who was traveling in the mountains found a precious stone in a stream. The next day she met another traveler who was hungry, and the wise woman opened her bag to share her food. The hungry traveler saw the precious stone and asked the woman to give it to him. She did so without hesitation.
The traveler left rejoicing in his good fortune. He knew the stone was worth enough to give him security for a lifetime. But, a few days later, he came back to return the stone to the wise woman. “I’ve been thinking,” he said. “I know how valuable this stone is, but I give it back in the hope that you can give me something even more precious. Give me what you have within you that enabled you to give me this stone.”
The reason why for example wisdom from Socrates is saved is because Plato started the Academia, the precursor of our Universities, that kept the wisdom. For example of Parmenides only part of one poem is still there and things written about him. It is because of for example theater -plays that ridiculed Socrates as a very ugly man mocking everyone-that we have so mcuh information.
About Africa, but I read a story of men who participated in rituals, who had very deep experiences. Wisdom of Africa is just not kept through writing or other ways that we know about. I found this on the internet:
Early in life Mr. Bowen seems to have been recognized for some special qualities by members of a Brotherhood whose Elders were said to be “guardians of ancient wisdom.” Evidence is shown of members of the Brotherhood living among the Zulu and the descendants of the old Bantu race of South Africa. Some of Mr. Bowen’s travels in central and East Africa were correctly prophesied, even to detours he would make that were not originally on his program and a meeting he would have with one of the “elder brothers.” He writes at length of that meeting and continued association with a small community in South Africa.
Mr. Bowen accepted an offer by one of the Elders to receive instruction in their ancient teachings, and his education continued for about a year until his work took him elsewhere. The Theosophist, will be reprinted here in a series of three short articles. Patrick Bowen (The Ancient Wisdom in Africa (Part 1 of 3).
Think about how little is know about Ayurvedic medicine is an medical system. I read amazing stories about how much more this medicine can achieve compared to our medical system. There is just so much not know.
“When the race is good, so is the place ” – Ralph Waldo Emerson
Hi Jeff, I found it so interesting that the day before you were to arrive for the weekend in Washington DC (9/25-26) to speak to all of us about Emerson, James, Peirce etc. I found in our house a little volume of Emerson’s Select Essays and Addresses. It is a Macmillan Pocket Classic and published in September, 1910, exactly one hundred years ago this month! More than a coincidence?! Thanks for the great weekend!
Hi Liesbeth,
I question your “Just like it is not about who is most enlightened, it is not about who is most evolved” and wonder even after your lengthy comments what leads you to minimize their significance. Can you go into this a bit?
Oh Liesbeth,
After reading further of your comments I understand your comment now and agree that it’s not a matter of who was more enlightened or evolved as all those great teachers revealed and shared with the rest of us wisdoms that were needed to be brought to bear on our consciousness.
Was it Plato who said all learning is only remembering what we already know? These great teachers reminded us of the teaching that resonates with us still. For that, we revere them.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts that I appreciate.
Aloha, Frank
Thank you for reading it en commenting! It is a nice start of a study day, on Saturday I wake up knowing that this is the moment to continue, it is like stepping into a different world; being in touch with essences instead of practicalities; with substance instead of categories.
It was indeed Plato who said that we are born with knowledge of the ideas (soul). What is so funny with these great philosophers is that at the moment of reading them it is so beautiful, whatever they say. But than moving to the next one, like now, going into Aristotle who denied that we are born with any knowledge that is suddenly so much more interesting. Like a child has the potential to become a grown-up, all knowledge is in potential there, but we first have to realize it. In the end the ‘essence’ of Plato and Aristotle are almost the same, with the difference that Plato points to heaven and Aristotle points to earth.
Hi Liesbeth,
It’s when these back and forths occur that blogging becomes alive and fun. Thank you for your attn and interesting comments.
I’m sure you are familiar with Plato saying that all learning is but remembering what we already know. What’s great about good teachers and he was certainly one is that they are very good at reminding us humans in large numbers of the truths we come to remember thanks to them.
Your comments are also helpful in givng me a brush up on the wisdoms you bring to my attn.
Thank you! Aloha, Frank