Help
Sign In
spritual transformation
October 2009 
Transform or Transcend: "Human being" as process
mikeS
I like my new friend Arjun's blog entry regarding "shadow work." Arjun believes we need to do our "shadow work," as he states "...to be free, enlightened human beings."
I think Arjun's discussion is truly excellent and I would only like to piggy-back on some points that he makes because they have touched on some thoughts that I have been rolling around with in the attic (as opposed to Wilber's shadow-work analogy, I don't own a garage).
Arjun states that he believes we need shadow work to be "free, enlightened human beings." Although part of me agrees, another part considers that it all depends on how you define "human being." This is because, if the definition of "human being" is that which requires "transcendence" through enlightenment, then the definition seems to have negative implications.
However, if "human being" is defined, as that which is involved in a "transformative process" that does not require "transcendence," then I believe we will experience less tension and strain with all that the "process" involves.
There are two terms I often get caught up in when discussing the identification of egoic attachments, or those obstructive shadows that impede our progress to "enlightenment." Those terms are "transformation" and "transcendence." Frequently, these terms are used interchangeably and assumed to be equivalent, but, is transcending the same as transformation? I think, maybe not.
Transcending demands that one "rise above" or "go higher," and "ascend." This thinking asserts a present state as below, or lower then, what we desire to become, as if at some point in ‘time' we once descended to what we now believe we are. We believe we are a "less than" we could be and that now requires "rising above." Therefore, what is asserted through the use of the narrative term of transcending, is that which is below and requires we ascend or rise above.
In conceptualizing that which I must "do" in my journey to transcendence, I actually posit myself as descendant and as a negation of what I desire to affirm. This is my status that must be "leaped out of" into that higher or new and improved state of being. But in my desire to rise above, what I now believe I am, do I not further press myself down into my egoic conceptualizations of "self"?
Obviously there is the belief that what I am is deficient and lowly; littleness and impotence, much below what I could be, which is much "higher" than I am now. Essentially, there is little acceptance of my present state, though I may give myself "lip-service" to that being OK, although, clearly this is not the "state" I desire to "achieve," which is the "enlightened state." Identified with the ego I am Unenlightened seeking to improve that condition to enlightenment.
So what does transformation assert? I believe that transforming the ego identifications, rather than transcending, allows for more acceptance of what I am and where I am in my "process."
There is no "leap" required, as I am exactly where I need to be in the process of transformation, in fact, I AM the process and I can now define that as "human being." To transform what IS, does not require a "rising above," merely a "seeing differently." For instance, the ego projections I may perform, as "anger," may be necessary in order to review and see it differently and thus it is enfolded within the process. Thus, I make amends to others (which, in the oneness of Being, is making amends to myself) and remain as process. My anger need not be transcended, simply undergo further transformative reviews within the overall process.
Arjun seems to feel that such transformation is an endless process and I have to agree, but I feel this can be seen as a positive attribute of the process. If transformation is confused with transcendence, then, yes, it seems an endless process, since I never really seem to be rising above what I am now. I have NOT reached my destination or achieved my ultimate goal.
Yet if transcendence is left out of the process, transformation is the way of being since it is what we are now IN and it is what we now ARE, as opposed to transcendence, which is what we are becoming. Through a transformative process, there is no expectation of "becoming" because the process is what you ARE and you will never leave IT, simply because it is YOU.
The ego mind loves transcendence, since what we are attempting to rise above is further asserted, with ever greater force, but equal to our ever greater desire to rise above. This is often the constant unrelenting tension inherent in conceptualizing transcendence or leaping above what we now believe we are. Both what is below and what is above is reinforced with ever greater intensity and this is the ever pressing continuum we seem mired in with no real progress and sometimes only continued frustration and disappointment.
Now, there is no desire to be other than what I AM, which is a "transformative process" that can never be transcended and is endless. But that's perfect because it only reinforces that I am infinite and eternally a "process." There is no thing or status to be transcended, only continued process to participate in and with.
I am a transformative process and this is how I conceptualize myself as BEING with no need to BE other then this. I am a process and "human" being is not an object or a subject but a process encompassing all within it. I am a process FREE of transcendence since nothing must be transcended only accepted as IS and part of the process.
I realize many may contend that this is semantical hair-splitting with no real adaptable potential. However, as a practicing psychotherapist, I do recognize that we define ourselves distinctly through the language we use. I only point out that the narrative we employ to define our spiritual journey may indeed, impede that journey if "transcendence" defines the process as opposed to transformation which IS the process and negates or rises above nothing.
"Human being" is a transformative process that is eternal. We may one day exit the body, as many spiritual masters seem to teach, however, I imagine we will not necessarily "transcend" it, as simply see it differently which will mean that it no longer holds value and will only fade from view. At some point along the way we may change the name of the process (like changing the term "human being" to God), but I suppose transforming labels, or being without labels, is also part of the process. Seeing differently does not demand that we rise above what we SEE, only change how it is SEEN and thereby transform it and make it all part of the process.
What do you think?
Thanks
mike S
Access: Public
if it helps you to see it this way, Mike, if it facilitates your process, then it's perfect
i think i almost totally agree but just tend to describe it differently
Thanks Nicole,
How would you describe it?
mike S
Mike, I'm sorry it took so long to get around to this, but I actually think it's just timing… of the universal sort ; )
I concluded some time back that this term 'human being' didn't just show up. It's just the natural thing. The drive to 'be-ing' has just shocked me; it seems along the way many people were convinced that they were lesser than; were 'smaller' than 'regular' humans are. There's so much self defeatism in this thinking!
And I think the proliferation of concepts and authors that persist in promoting the idea that 'shifts' and 'great ascension' must take place in order that we become what is possible has definitely not helped. It's built the fear thing right up and added to an already depleted sense of self-ful-ness of many people. It's really quite unfortunate.
I do agree that human being is indeed our true state; it's listed 'present continuous' for some reason… some very good reason, and allows for gradual transformation over time, otherwise termed growth or evolution; all concepts of a natural course of any existence.
The biggest difficulty, if we consider it such, is recognising that the mind's made up of so much mental clutter, of the form which burdens thinking wisely, and perhaps we should simply slow it down and strip the thinking down. To slow down is a new concept in itself in many lives.
Nonetheless I'm in agreement that perfectly functional human being is not just possible but standard, if we resist our tendencies to go to expectations and open up ourselves to possiblity that we are ok… already… no Ascension necessary, just live the process, and take some time for reflecting.
There's something to think about!
Thanks very much Mike. This is why I LIKE YOU!
Much love to everyone reading today.
sherri :D
Well put Mike.
I'm remember part of a Bible verse that says “… be ye therefore transformed by the renewing of your mind …” which speaks to this.
'To transform what IS, does not require a “rising above,” merely a “seeing differently.” '
Sounds like you are saying, and correct me if I misspeak it (just wanting to summarize it here for myself), that -
-we are okay just as we are and we are in the process and not separate from it, and
-in the experience of the process, we may transform, and
-transformation is okay
Is that is - I'm trying to get my simple mind around this beautiful stuff.
Sherri - thanks for pointing me to this.
Mike - I like the idea of not transcending or rising above or getting out of what “we are”. As if we are bad. It's the old, “Fall of Man” and garden of eden BS thing isn't it?
Thanks Mike for the post.
great discussion.
Mike, I think I explained how i see this in my other responses to you other blogs.
John, i read that verse differently. being transformed by the renewing of your mind, for me is, yes, seeing differently, but it's also making different choices based on that different seeing that leads to a different life. a transformed and renewed life.
I think it's important to accept who we are and not reject. it's important to understand we are in process and not separate from it, and that we not only may transform in that process but must transform to live. as the caterpillar must transform into the butterfly or die. transformation is more than ok it is Life itself. Life is never static, we are always transforming. Physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually. Sometimes transformation is very rapid, sometimes extremely slow. It is always what it is, and that is good.
About the fall of humanity, I don't see it as BS. there is a sense in which webegin, separated from our Selves, and from Love and the ground of our being, and spend our lives learning to become more and more connected.
But it doesn't have to do with the things that usually are considered causative, like many people have somehow concluded that the Fall has to do with sex, when that is not in any way part of the story.
On the contrary - shame came as a consequence of the Fall - if we know ourselves fully and know God thta way, there is no shame in our body and only pure delight in the body of the other, so no need for covering up (and I think this goes far beyond the purely physical and extends to the way that we cover up all kinds of aspects of ourselves for fear we will not be loved and accepted as we truly are inside).
Yes, it is about being an Open Door so to speak. That we transform from being closed to open is about living the fullness of our human potential, no? I personally never thought it had anything to do with sex.
I apppreciate that we are in the process and that we can choose to transform in order to live now, and for the future of humankind, but maybe ultimately humankind will disappate entirely from the process. The clear picture I see is that IT IS ALL OKAY (in the bigger scheme of things - nothing is ever lost.) I'm simply going to do my best and try to be an Open Door for myself and for others. Imagine what it would be like to live in a world where all Doors were open - the doors to our physical homes and the doors to our hearts.
But one last question - where was this shame and what was it's original source if there is only one source, one mind, one God?
ah, that last question… that's a very difficult one… i answer that with free will - we can choose to be ashamed, to turn away from Source…
I like that, being an Open Door. And living the fullness of our human potential. I'd love a world with all doors open
John, I love how your thinking is coming through. This, actually, is the driving force of my message and my focus on encouraging human potential as my purpose. As it stands, we probably use about maximum 30% of our potential, while being consumed with our 'selves', the disconnected part which most people give significant power to. There's no right or wrong of it, it's just the case.
I expect that that with continued raising of consciousness - which I hope to continue contributing to with my work - it will be a case where more humans will individually extend themselves further and further and quite naturally more will be accomplished from right here in our present space.
The idea of 'the Fall' is another of those questionable terms in terms of the purity and, frankly, credibility of Source. It definitely is a judgment!
Man has been expressing its Free Will alternative over time; it's a Gift to us. We can express it [our Free Will] again whenever we are open to it.
The judgment of past actions using religious terms and standards is possibly one of the least effective ways to contextualise all that is happening around us… I don't suggest it.
Being open also means accepting that the church is strongly influenced by individual leaders and messages are at the very least, skewed in specific [agenda driven] directions. We ought to reference our True selves and our own Source[s] - as a function of own Free Will - and take steps in a positive direction IMO. Invariably we will find that judgment is effective in mobilising, only to a very short point…
Peace and love to you all,
Sherrilene
Hey guys!
Good to hear from ya and great discussion indeed!
Yes, the point behind the essay is about interpretations and the language which symbolizes our interpretations. My difficulty with 'transcendence' is that it posits incompletion and seems to negate the process as 'wholeness.' Wereas 'transformation' may be an interpretation that allows us to relate to it all as 'process.' Possibly, transformation allows, as Satya states, a greater openeness. The bottom line for me is that God is an interior engagment that may be avoided or, at the least delayed, if we're seeking to 'leave' or 'exit' that which we now ARE. The paradox is that we need neither reject nor accept as this asserts a control of what is certain. How could God NOT be certain? Therefore, how could your corresponding with that Spirit within NOT be certain?Looks to me like it is.
I was relating to the Christian 'conversation' which we in western culture have been engaged in since birth (often unaware that we are in such an ongoing inner dialogue with the very culture we are indoctrinated into). All of the dialogues I post in this 'blog' are an attempt at an alternative interpretation. But then, I realize that for the most part it's all been said before.
As for free-will, I have been riding with that concept for some time and i will be posting some 'interpretations' soon which many may disagree with quite strongly. This is because I'm inclined to a belief that there is no such thing as 'free-will.' Granted, I realize that even my ego rebels against the conceptualization that I have no 'choice,' but I'm starting to realize the greater concept of 'certainty' which may be more related to our spiritual path.
Anyway, as always, I'm just saying…
Thanks again Nicole, Satya and Sherri. I really enjoyed reading your thoughts.
Peace Angels,
mike S
Mike, I look forward to this discussion as well. It is an area I have been exploring myself in recent times.
Thanks again; this was lovely. sherri
i look forward to a discussion on free will, if you wish, here and or on the God Pod