PARADIGMS OF THE SOUL: Introduction -1- Plato in his Myth of Er uses a...word, paradeigma, a basic form encompassing your destiny. Though this accompanying image shadowing your life is the bearer of fate and fortune, it is not a moral instructor or to be confused with conscience. Hillman, James The Souls Code: In Search of Character and Calling New York by Random House 1996 p. 9 Even though we think of soul-level activity as having to do with questions of taste, discernment, and morality, the Soul's paradigm carries with it no predetermined moral baggage, no particular set of qualitative judgments. The paradigm system can be seen as that which exists a priori to the questions of moral judgment--judgment which is a result of the interaction of Spirit, Soul, and individual life experience. Morality is a consequential soul-level entity, and is expressed not through words, but through action, action based on qualities of justice and compassion, which, like great art and great ideas, is the result of the interworking of historic, present, and projected perceptions and decisions. The paradigms are outside of the realm of past-present-future decision making, except at the point of their formation as a framework for the calling of the individual soul. The paradigms spoken of here are not the result of life experience, unless the stance that we have lived past lives is assumed, and that the experience of those lives affects the present life. The paradigms are much like the genetic framework which determines the organization of the physical body, but they perform an organizational function at the soul level. The genes themselves do not produce the higher functions of the organism (we cannot find Hamlet at the genetic level), but they do direct the organization of the organism, its potential capabilities, and how the organism will evolve through the different stages required to actualize its teleological goals. The paradigms are organizing entities on the soul level. One would not look for moral functioning, as can be defined within the context of social interaction, or psychological health, to be expressed by the genes themselves. The genes allow physical form to be expressed within the context of the needs and purposes of the particular organism. However, an individual's moral system, while dependent on the work of the physical being for expression, is not merely that physically-based system itself, and nothing more. The moral system transcends and includes the physical system. The paradigms allow situation-appropriate expression of the individual soul's purpose in the context of the individual life. At the most basic soul level, one soul may be organized to express power and dominance, primarily, while another may be oriented more toward perseverance and individual purpose. No moral judgment applies at this level of organization. Genetically, one individual may have an advantage in sports, while another may be set up more advantageously in the area of intellectual pursuits. Again, no moral judgment applies. This is not to say that the spirit does not, at -2- times, push athletes into the area of intellectual goals, and that the athletes are not able to accomplish intellectual feats that deserve admiration. But this may take special concentration and efforts which are not required by a person genetically endowed with special intellectual power. Each soul has its own "genetic" (paradigmatic) advantages and disadvantages. These proclivities can be circumvented or modified through efforts of the spirit, so that each individual may, to some degree, make up for a perceived lack in a specific area of expression. For example, it is well known that those individuals who are in the sciences often look for an artistic outlet, to give their lives balance. Some people seem to "have everything", but this is usually because they have learned, consciously or unconsciously, to work through areas of perceived discrepancy from the level of spirit, a level which transcends and includes the level of the soul. When all the souls had chosen their lives, they went before Lachesis. And she sent with each, as the guardian of his life and the fulfiller of his choice, the daimon that he had chosen, and this divinity led the soul first to Clotho, under her hand and her turning of the spindle to ratify the destiny of his lot and choice, and after contact with her, the daimon again led the soul to the spinning of Atropos to make the web of its destiny irreversible, and then without a backward look it passed beneath the throne of Necessity. --Plato, Republic X, 620e The question arises, "Why paradigms in the first place?". In a sense this is like asking, "Why do we have genes?". The genes of a Sequoia enable it to withstand a certain kind of environment with relative ease, while the genes of a Date palm allow it to flourish in a quite different environment. Both are trees, but each has a different expression, environment, and, in a sense, purpose at the level of its physical manifestation. Each has a different "fate", and a different "necessity", at least in the qualitative and quantitative detail of its higher functions (flowers, fruit, leaf structure, water temperature requirements, etc.). If we can acknowledge that there is a difference between these two kinds of trees, a difference which is determined at the genetic level, a difference which is expressed on a level more complex than the genetic level itself, and which cannot be seen in its expressive aspect in the genes themselves, but only in the tree in its entirety, then we can then see, by way of analogy, the purpose of the paradigms on the level of soul for a human being. We must clearly distinguish between the "hardware" and the "software" of the organism. The hardware is there (has its purpose) in order to run the software (express the purpose of the life of the human being). The paradigms exist in order to "run" the life of the soul. They do not determine the specific "programming" of the soul, that is up to the individual Ego-Soul-Spirit as an entity. -3- The paradigms are there to allow the expression of the individual Soul, but they are not the expression itself, or rather not the expression in its manifested entirety. There are all sorts of more sophisticated levels of the soul, which can be seen from a certain perspective as the roots, bark, limbs, leaves, and flowers. Of course, in the human being, the ultimate level of expression as a member of the species, in all of its complexity, remains as a potential still to be defined. It is questionable whether that definition can ever be arrived at in any conclusive sense. Necessity is what the genes are there to accommodate. In order to attain to a certain purpose, one must have a certain genetic organization by necessity- -an animal cannot perform the purpose of a plant. Purpose determines the details of necessity, purpose being thought of as an aspect of the world of spirit. The organism is set up at the genetic level to facilitate the acquiring of what is necessary for the organism's survival, flourishing, and "systems fit" in the web of life. The necessity of an arctic rhizome is quite different from that of a liana of the rainforest. On the soul level, the paradigms are the mechanisms by which the individual soul is set up to accomplish its purpose, sometimes what is termed the calling or life path, that is, the particular manifestation which spirit, through the work of the soul, is to take for a given individual during his or her lifetime. This purpose-of-the-individual as an entity is the "daimon" (DYE- mon) in Plato's account. Are we to be a delicately refined "hothouse flower", or a robust bromeliad in this life? Perhaps neither of these examples apply to the reader, but the point of the argument remains. If you are Mr. Universe, and also a brilliant concert pianist in the same lifetime, you are indeed an "unusual flower". On the genetic level we can see that fate and destiny do apply. The fate and destiny of a raspberry bush is noticeably different from that of a redwood tree. We can of course see similarities on the level of the interdependent web of life, but on the level of individual expression each is set up quite differently. When we look at each we come away with quite a different impression. There are many levels of similarities, and many levels of difference, all genetically coded, but of greater complexity than the level of the genes themselves. We cannot taste a raspberry by tasting its genes only. Also we cannot experience all of what it is to be an ensouled human being merely by understanding the paradigm system of a particular individual. But by acknowledging the paradigms we can see what is "natural" to the soul of the individual, and, by contrast, what will probably require either conscious or unconscious work, extra experience and/or spiritual focus by the individual, if he or she is placed in a situation which is "unnatural" for his or her individual soul organization. Tropical orchids can survive very well in Alaska if somebody builds the greenhouse. Building the greenhouse is a metaphor for spiritual work. A master artist, with a slight build, could become a champion weightlifter with the right spiritual effort, and if provided the right circumstances. This is how an individual can modify the work of the "fates" , referred to in the quote above. -4- In the final analysis, we count for something only because of the essential we embody, and if we do not embody that, life is wasted. --C.G. Jung If we have had a conscious taste of our personal calling, we will never entirely forget the experience. But we can quite easily ask ourselves, "How often do I get a clear taste, and how long does it seem to last?" Those who are living their life purpose from a conscious standpoint, on a moment to moment basis, seem to be few and far between. The individuals who are able to do this rarely have the same sorts of questions as do those who are still searching for their calling--who have not felt, from an egoically conscious standpoint, their connection to the world at large. Finding life purpose requires at least one of three things (there may be more, but this is all that I will cover at this time). One is a mature, healthy ego. I don't mean merely having an ego. A mature, healthy ego, unless one is a very rare prodigy, can only be acquired over time. The Cherry tree is not expected to produce a crop of cherries when it is only a sapling. Perhaps it can be forced to do so by some mad scientist, or by some very greedy business entrepreneur in conjunction with a mad scientist, but one must question if this really produces a healthy tree. Quality of life becomes an issue here. I always worry about young children who, at the age of 4 or so, are always and continually forced to make decisions for themselves which require the perspective of a mature ego. Often the children, through pressured necessity, are able to come up with viable responses of some sort. But it is my view that the parents are like mad scientists, willing to try to circumvent all of the laws of nature in order to get their children to "produce", or "be independent", or "develop" so as to always "get ahead". True greatness takes time, at least in almost all cases. Maybe this type of tampering diverts energy which is supposed to be used for developing "roots", and "branches" in the life of a youngster. Why do they need to produce fruit at such a young age? I believe it has more to do with insecurity, and lack of healthy, mature ego in the parents, rather than having much to do with the child. Under pressure, the ego of the child can be strengthened without the benefit of maturity. No wonder there are so many children running around in adult bodies in our society. It makes life Hell for those who have been allowed to mature, egoically, at a healthy, natural pace. If the ego is allowed to mature at its own pace, over time, in a safe and loving atmosphere, it will, in most cases, recognize its calling, at least to some extent. The fruit, depending of course on the genetic make up, and other health factors, will emerge of its own accord, at the proper time. In another context, life purpose, or calling, can be provided for an individual by others. This is neither good nor bad per se, but if the individual has a life path which is not recognized, or is in conflict with others, it can make life dismal for all concerned. I -5- can not speak authoritatively about other cultures, but in contemporary America there is usually a great price to pay concerning the individual's psychology, and perhaps physical well-being (for example, when drugs or obsessions are involved) when the discovery is made that the individual life purpose is only to serve someone else, or the society, or some hegemony. If the ego is not mature enough, or strong enough, to find its way out of the dilemma, the usual destination is, in the better case, the psychiatrist's couch, or, in the worse case, "escape" to violence, drugs, and alcohol. A sense of purposelessness is often pervasive. If one's ego is not in a healthy state, one must do one's best to find someone with a healthy ego and enlist their aid. The issue of meaning versus meaninglessness can take on very unpleasant characteristics if not treated with purpose, persistence, compassion, and patience. One of the other ways of developing healthy ego is in the realm of trusted, proven spiritual practice. This can come about in the form of artistic endeavor, meditation, religious devotion based on principles of justice and compassion, psychoanalysis, philosophy, or other related paths. These paths often take time, something which the struggling, immature ego feels that it doesn't have, so these paths are usually the most beneficial in the long run for people who have had some sort of revelation, or at least a strong hint, concerning what it is like to have a healthy ego. This experience can be used as a touchstone by which the leadership of others, and their specific religious or philosophical systems, can be evaluated. Here one needs to be very careful to see to it that the chosen path is not there to patch up an unhealthy ego, so that the ego can continue to do with comfort the same repetitive, unhealthy things to itself which it has done in the past, without penalty. Religions which preach love only for a chosen few are often appealing to egos in trouble. They require no growth or transformation, only conformity, repetition, and intransigence. Charismatic gurus are also to be treated with kid gloves, for the same basic reasons. An unhealthy ego wants to be cured by someone else, without having to go through the responsibility of assuming its own care. However, when sincere and effective help is offered, the ego on the right path, knows when to accept help. It is the individual with a reasonably healthy ego, an ego which can lead him or her to a sense of purpose with dignity, who has the best chance of discovering a true calling, one which will increase a feeling of life's worth, and will help the ego to abandon feelings of powerlessness and self destruction. There may be a time to relinquish the ego, but one must have a healthy one to relinquish in the first place, otherwise the value of the ego in the process of spiritual actualization of the individual is missed. Meaning is invisible, but the invisible is not contradictory of the visible: the visible itself has an invisible inner framework, and the in-visible is the secret counterpoint of the visible. --M. Merleau-Ponty, Working Notes -6- One might ask, "If the paradigms exist, why can we not see them?" The answer is that we can, on both inner and outer levels, if we ask questions which are not committing categorical errors. If one has been told that God lives in the sky, and then proceeds to fly up in the space shuttle and sees no one, and then proceeds to the conclusion that there is no God, one may be committing a categorical error. This kind of error is not at all uncommon. A rational positivist will admit the truth of nothing which the five senses cannot detect directly. But who can detect in such a manner, that is by concrete proofs, the reality of the effects of a play by William Shakespeare, a symphony of Beethoven's, the power of a poem by William Blake, or a painting by Monet? Who can define the mystery of Love, the transforming power of Compassion, or the beauty in the eyes of a child? Are these qualities of life "not real"? We make categorical errors without even suspecting that we might be doing so, sometimes even in the name of Truth, or Justice. There are many truths which are not immediately visible, usually because we have not trained our attention to look in the needed ways, or because our questions contain assumptions which apply only in a limited sense, if at all. Sometimes this throws suspicion on the questioning process itself, which can be beneficial, but often leads to frustration and an abandonment of the questioning process altogether. It is all right to question the invisible. Sometimes things appear on other levels to give us clues as to how to ask the next time. For instance, in response to the question, "Do the paradigms really exist?", I would encourage the questioner to take the same steps to the validation process as one would take with a scientific experiment. Start with an hypothesis, test the hypothesis in as many ways, and under as many conditions, as is possible, discuss the results with others who are doing similar sorts of work, and form your own conclusions. The paradigm system is in no way meant to be dogmatic. It is either a fact, such as the "fact" that hatred poisons whatever it touches, or not. Also, soul-level phenomena have manifestations on the physically-embodied plane, since they transcend and include the physical realm. See if the displayed behavior of someone you know is paradigmatic. This concept is certainly not without precedent in the psychological literature, but such classifications are usually reserved for pathological categories, and are not usually used within a generalized framework, except in such areas as Jung's personality types, and Piaget's system describing the development of cognitive abilities. In these two systems we can see the unfolding of the "genetic coding", or paradigms, of the soul. Jung's extrovert/introvert, sensing/intuiting, and feeling/thinking categories of manifested behavior all have a paradigmatic basis. For example: the extrovert often has the paradigm configuration of the power or aggression mode, with a goal of growth or dominance, usually with moving or emotional centering, often with a chief obstacle of arrogance, or impatience. The precise meaning of these terms will be discussed in later chapters. Piaget's developmental stages are also "genetically encoded" on a soul level. We shall see how this is true later in this book (see fulcrums-monads). -7- Scientists have been unable to discover many profound principles that relate the action of mothers, fathers, or siblings to psychological characteristics in the child. --Jerome Kagan, The Nature of the Child The statement above can be seen in several different lights. The first impression seems to imply a throwing up of the hands, with the comment that science, in all of its wisdom, should have come up with some sort of workable answer to the riddle of family psychology by now. Why has science not come up with any "profound" answers concerning the subject? Perhaps science and scientism (a worship of quasi-scientific techniques) have become confused in the process of questioning. Established scientific principles need not be excluded in approaching the question of the psychology of relationships. However, as can be seen by examining the lives of scientists of the past, breakthroughs into new areas of exploration are not always the result of step-by-step processes, or do not always fit neatly into a logical progression, one to the next. Intuition, inspiration, insight, and curiosity about seemingly inconsequential concepts and perceptions often play a leading role in new discoveries. Einstein used his imagination coupled with an astounding intellect to reach areas undreampt of by others before him. Later, when the brainstorming is over, the concepts arrived upon through non-ordinary, or non-conventional means must be tested and retested in life experience. Maybe the question itself, contained in the quote above, points toward a pathway of exploring the answer. Perhaps the undiscovered "profound principles" do not have their basis in family relationships per se. A more productive line of questioning might lie outside of the usual framework of the questioner. My view, one which includes the paradigms of the soul, is that the focus of the question is too narrow. Yes, family life has an influence on the psychological development of the individual. But perhaps the level of "principles" runs deeper than that. Perhaps the very principles which are sought are not based upon, or do not arise directly out of, interpersonal relationships, but rather come from an even deeper level of the psyche. I am referring to a level of being which is usually termed "unconscious" but may have many conscious manifestations. If we search for profound principles only at the level of the conscious mind, we may run into a wall beyond which nothing seems to exist. This is when we usually throw up our hands and either give up, or continue with perseveration along the same path, hoping that something will emerge. There is another possibility--pursue the problem along different lines altogether, perhaps even into realms considered taboo by those devoted to scientism. We can always return to the "scientific method", at a later time, to test the validity of our discoveries. -8- So, at this point I need to brainstorm. During the brainstorming process I need to abandon my usual judgmental framework and allow seeming impossibilities to enter the picture, at least for awhile. Could the source of our present perception, based on information coming directly from the family's interaction, be limited? What if the source of psychological principles lies in a different category, or realm of exploration? What might these realms be? My thinking moves toward issues of heredity. Could the answer be found in genetics? Some might say so, and continue the search along these lines. I will abandon this path for now, not because I do not see it as productive, but because my intuition tells me that my answer will not be found solely in the realm of the physical organization of the body. However, there is something about the idea of "genetics" which still intrigues me, and my intuition says that there is something about the concept of genetic organization which will help me on my search. I am reminded of the work of the 19th-century Austrian Monk, Gregor Mendel, whose work with pure-breeding garden peas was the launching pad for the hereditary theory of the 1920's and '30's. He conceived of hereditary units, now called genes, through observation of seven primary characteristics found in the pea plants over many generations. He never saw a gene directly, but did hypothesize the existence of gene pairs (we will later see how the concept of gene pairs and the polar aspects of the paradigms relate), through careful observation, and critical analysis. We cannot see genes with the naked eye. Tools are needed, physical tools which have been developed over time, and which have come into use as a result of many years of devotion to their development. These tools may have come into being for reasons seemingly unrelated to the genetic question itself, but we can use them for genetic research anyway. Perhaps there are "tools" of perception in our psyches which can come into being as a result of working with our attention in certain ways. For example, a fine musician, after years of practice and attention, can see into and express music in ways that those who have not developed that particular attention can marvel at. One could say that the musician has finely developed a tool of his or her psyche, and can "see" and "hear" with the attention at a level which is extraordinary. Perhaps this is a possibility, this refinement of the attention, for ourselves with regard to the psyche. Many years of meditation practice might be implemented to this effect. Our honed attention could be called upon to be used as a "microscope" in the realm of the psyche. Once we have engaged in the meditation practice itself we might come to see that our perceptions can change concerning who and what we are, and what we are able to do with our awareness on a conscious level. We may not do anything differently than before, but now what we are doing is brought to a different level of awareness, perhaps more in the realm of waking consciousness--less of what we do is unconscious. We are developing a new tool, not with the goal of having a tool, but with the meditative side effect of growing clearer awareness and perception with which to view life. Now we can turn that attention to the realm of the psyche. We have heard others make statements such as, "Oh, she's such a pragmatist.", or, "He's a power monger!", but we have not taken such observations very seriously. We believe that here is the end of the story, and we don't go on from there, we merely -9- accept the statement as a fact, the source of which can not be known in any profound sense. We can conjecture and opine concerning what the source might be, but we look with a sort of self-satisfied skepticism at anyone who might try to pick up the pace and look for "profound principles" concerning these attitudes. Someone might flippantly say, "It's just the way that she was made, don't question it, just accept it." But in this rather glib comment there may be some grain of truth. Maybe she was made that way, but how, and to what purpose? Was it merely to tick us off? Some might be willing to say so, and there may again be a kernel of truth there, but why stop at such a superficial level? This observation might be worth exploring, over time, and with real interest, rather than receiving merely a wave of the hand and an early dismissal. This book is about the possibility of a heredity theory of the soul, about the possibility of gene-like entities which exist as the "hardware" of our emotions, of our expressive choices, of our likes and dislikes, and of the way that we travel our life path. One always learns one's mystery at the price of one's innocence. --Robertson Davies, Fifth Business The "price of one's innocence" is always an issue in one's life. We relinquish innocence whenever we grow. The process of lost innocence has been an issue throughout the ages. I can remember times in my life when I was told, "Come on, grow up, be a man." Sometimes this was good advice when it was a spur toward healthy growth, and I was being stubborn or balking. At other times it was meant to coerce me into doing something which was against my conscience, or pressure applied so that I would try to perform a task for which I was unprepared. It takes a somewhat sensitive person to be able to know the difference between expediency and proper timing. We must, in the ideal case, attempt to make fine discernments, for our welfare and the welfare of others, when exploring our inner selves, without clinging to a puerile need for absolute control. For an example of this we can go to the garden. The wise gardener knows when to plant, foster, nurture, and harvest. The gardener does not allow goats into the spring garden, or allow pests to undermine the general health of his protectorate. He also sees the varying rates of growth of the different species, and caters to the demands of each. The wise gardener does have a vision, one which is in accord with nature, and which will, barring unforeseen circumstances, be a guiding principle in helping to bring a healthy and prosperous harvest. The wise gardener also knows that not every life circumstance is under control, but that judicious preparation combined with sophistication of understanding and technique will, in most cases, provide success. This is the most that anyone can do. The mystery of the inner self is much like the "mystery" of the garden. We do not enter the garden until we are ready to take some responsibility for it, at least to the -10- degree that we attempt to do no harm upon first entry. We do not start by pulling up all of the plants to see what is underneath! We wait, watch, listen, observe, and enlist the help and advice of those who have been there before. We ask questions, check the answers with our own observations, and strive to nurture those who are there to benefit ourselves, and the other members of the garden-as-an-entity. We see that some of our initial judgments were in error, and that others were on the mark. We do not bemoan the loss of our innocence concerning gardening, but see that the process of understanding is a continuing one, never completely over, and that there are always deeper understandings ahead to be pondered, acted upon, and inculcated. We surrender a naive wish for control, and nurture a sense of process, teamwork, devotion, and mutual trust. We see that success is never guaranteed, but that does not stop us from working. We have a goal which we keep before us as a guide, not a master. If our inner life can be seen as a living process, not apart from the outer life, but existing with it, simultaneously, in a world of great depth and span, and if we have a wish to grow in our awareness, responsibility, and conscious participation in the forces which shape our lives, then we are ready to enter the garden. Some enter by accident, have some sort of unpleasant experience, and make the conscious attempt to never return. This is a tragedy in most cases, although some may not be ready to assume the responsibility for living there, and should enter only under the guidance of someone with great wisdom. Others are forced to enter because of starvation, and are frequently fed, but are not willing to become gardeners. They rely on those who know and nurture the garden for their sustenance, sometimes seeing the gardeners as their rightful benefactors, sometimes having a sincere sense of appreciation, but never delving deeply into its mystery themselves. They may even pay the gardeners for the work being done, and this can be a good thing, but they miss the process, feel apart from it, feel acted upon, rather than sharing in the richness of becoming fully immersed in the beauty, drama, and wonder of it all. In our life experience loss of innocence can be amply compensated for by gain in appreciation, participation, compassion, wisdom, and love. These qualities can be the fruit of the inner garden, and come about in a natural, unforced way. If the process of growth is inhibited by the egotistic fear of loss, this is what is unnatural, this is where alienation and angst flourish, this is what causes inner upheaval and outer cynicism, and even violence. We cannot avoid noticing the garden forever. There will be a time when we are called upon to nurture it--sometimes for a brief moment, sometimes for a lifetime. Our very lives are linked to it, and it to us. What does all of this have to do with the paradigms of the soul? The awareness of the paradigms comes about in a natural way. We start by having an inkling that our peers seem to display certain patterns in their responses to the world. We start to search our own awareness and find that we too may be displaying patterns which we can recognize. For instance, one of our friends seems to see life as a challenge, another as a place of learning, another as a divine forum, another as a place to be creative, another as a place to express themselves, another as a place of service, -11- another as a place to be a master. We might see our usual response as something different from these, although at times we share any or all of the above responses. Perhaps ours has something more to do with acceptance of what life is, and the processing which it offers. We are fairly certain that we, and our peers, work from these patterns as if they were common to everyone, and we wonder if perhaps everyone has the same patterns, and if these patterns truly are common to everyone that we know. We start to suspect that the patterns, if they exist, are not conscious, at least not always. Here is where we start to wonder if there is something that we might be missing. At this point our attention starts to shift. We seem to be able to see into this question only so far, and no further. Many individuals stop at this point and write a book, or abandon the search with the attitude that these patterns are "merely" part of life's mystery, not something which we can understand in any profound way. We see that it seems difficult to stay with the question. When we turn our attention to it we are led, in our awareness, to an area that is unfamiliar, perhaps dreamlike, perhaps seemingly empty. We see that it seems to be difficult to "stay awake" in this realm of awareness. For example, when listening to classical music during my early years I now realize that I heard mostly passages, passing moments, brief interludes, astounding but fragmented. It took many listenings to a symphony of Beethoven before I could keep my attention on the entire symphony. Most of my friends either left the room after a short time, or fell asleep. I tried to keep my attention present at times by forcing it to be there. This made me sleepy. Somehow, some way, I began to question the quality of my attention. If Beethoven could stay in this "space of awareness" for such a long time, why was it that I had such a hard time there? Was it possible to develop attention? I knew that I wanted to try this because I valued what I was hearing, and wanted to hear more, and more deeply. The question kept returning; do people have different qualities of attention, and does attention vary depending upon circumstance? After several years of coming back to this question from time to time I realized that the "effectiveness" of my attentive engagement with a classical piece also had to do with the attention of the performers. If the performers were attentively engaged with only the technical aspect of execution, I also was mostly engaged with that aspect, whether at a live performance, or while listening to a recording. Other performances seemed to be coming from another world, a greater world, and the technical aspects of the performance were secondary. My attention could rest with the music quite easily during the latter performances. Somewhere in my consciousness I had an aha! experience. This aha! occurred over time and needed repeated verifications. There are different levels of attention, I thought, and there are very significant differences of attention from person to person, and from time to time. The "deeper" levels, in their life manifestations, seemed to call to my awareness from a strange and beautiful world, a world about which I wanted to know more. In the Seattle Youth Symphony I made mention to a colleague that one of the reasons that I thought music was so wonderful was that I could express whatever -12- emotion was called for without having to worry about its damage to the world, it was all in a safe context of musical expression, and that this expression was coming from a world which was greater than our own. It seemed to be a world of cosmic forces, dreams, and inspiration. My friend looked at me as if I might need immediate and serious help! At this point in life I was starting to explore the world of consciousness-unconsciousness, the "garden" spoken of before. I wasn't quite sure what I was doing, but I was doing something. My attention was growing in depth and span, not because I was doing anything that I knew of directly, but because I was more and more attracted to areas of "deep water". I wanted to explore those areas through the arts, and literature. I had entered a new world, and though my conscious engagement with that world varied, the experience of entry into that world was generally present at some level. How I came with my conscious awareness to participate in that "new" world is another story for another time. Suffice it to say I have now entered the profession of "gardener", with the concomitant understanding that I have a lot to learn. This came about over a long period of several decades, it was a natural experience, and it is still full of innocence, but an innocence with a different flavor. I don't develop; I am. --Pablo Picasso Arguments about development are almost always rhetorical. The real question is, "What develops?". The term Spiritual development is a term of convenience. A better term is Spiritual actualization. Am I consciously living in harmony with Spirit? Am I knowingly directed from the source of my awareness? These are questions which get us closer to the point. When I am perceiving the world in a state approaching full awareness, which is including my most basic essence, or spirit, I work, or act, with a different quality than when I am only immersed in my egoic desires and motivations. This can be noticed on an egoic level. Different, more inclusive perceptions enter my waking consciousness. It is from this state of expanded perception that principles can appear which tie together seemingly unrelated details and isolated moments. Picasso was known for being able to bring diverse moments of time and perception into an immediate framework. Shapes were determined in a context of multiple-time-based perceptions, and moods were juxtaposed, giving his works a feeling of timelessness. One could surmise that he was working from a state of relatively expanded awareness, that is relative to what most would consider "normal". Perhaps his worldview was based in aperspectival, non-dual reality, I cannot say. This would imply that he was always working from his total self, physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual. His work seems to point to a certain state of freedom which might be part-and-parcel of this expanded awareness. From there the term -13- development would be meaningless, and one would turn the attention only to the actualization of insight and inspiration. Work, from this standpoint, is not then seen as development, but rather as pure creation. The paradigms of the soul are forms in which a purely creative act can occur, forms which are needed for the sake of communication. A paradigm is essentially empty of content. It is rather the quality of the setting of the stage upon which the drama of life is to be lived out, whether it be a war story, a love story, a comedy, or a tragedy. An example of this would be a life story in which the theme of acceptance is played out, with the main character being a school teacher, who loses his voice in a traffic accident. The stage on which the ensuing drama is realized is the paradigms. If one is frustrated in achieving one's creative goals, yet still believes in one's purpose, one might seek out the soul- level form, or paradigm, of perseverance, a quality which can invoke the soul's strength and determination to carry on, despite hindrances and setbacks. Here the "stage is set" with the scenery and props which would reflect such paradigms as strength, mastery, power, aggression, stubbornness, and victory (or defeat). Dramatic content is supplied through individual choice. If one is feeling empty and without internal fire, one could seek out the paradigm of passion, where the self is brought more fully into the intensity which is required for effective action. Passion can then lead to self- actualization, where the self provides the content for given situations. Picasso's Guernica is an example of a passionate "stage setting" filled with specific images, images provided by the artist. The forms, or paradigms, based on the level of the soul, are without specific content in their essence. Who can describe passion in life without describing it with some sorts of adjectives? These adjectives, such as verve, devotion, energy, intensity, etc., are the basic hues, and/or moods, of the content of the paradigm of passion, the scenery of the stage. The individual then provides the details of the story, for which the paradigms are the framework of expression. The paradigm of passion is the state of passion itself, something which can only be experienced, and which cannot be fully described in words. But it is the attempt to describe the state of a certain paradigm, using situation-specific details, which generates the context and line of the story. The paradigms exist for the sake of development of the individual soul. One person lives their life from the passion paradigm, another from the beauty paradigm, another from the peace paradigm, and so on, each soul learning the lessons of the paradigms but within the context of the specific details of the individual life. We may voluntarily choose to seemingly change from paradigm to paradigm during our life, but these changes are temporary, not for the life as a whole, not pertaining to the long haul. When and if we can come into full conscious awareness of, and conscious harmony with the paradigms, from an egoic standpoint, we then come to truly "know ourselves", perhaps not in all of the details, but in the essence of a given life situation or circumstance. At this point, development of the self can stop or go on, whichever, but the path becomes a conscious choice rather than a matter of compulsion, and greater freedom in relationship and understanding of others becomes possible. It can be a great moment when we can clearly see our own paradigms in action, and it can also be a great moment when we discover the paradigms in which other souls are working. -14- Even before reason there is the inward movement which reaches out towards its own. --Plotinus, III.4.6 Each individual soul has a calling, or a life path, either a conscious or an unconscious purpose which is expressed during the individual's lifetime. The calling and the paradigms are "tailor-made" for the individual, all working together to facilitate the individual's expression in their particular life circumstance. A football player might have a life calling of heroic stardom, where the paradigms of aggression, dominance, cynicism, and physically energetic centering all work to facilitate expression of the calling. A teacher might have quite a different paradigm system, to facilitate a calling of greater life understanding. His or her paradigms might include acceptance, growth, and a realistic attitude, with centering in the intellectual areas, but also including paradigms concerning aspects of intuition, patience, and compassion. These two individuals above will probably be drawn to different focuses of attention and quality, different comrades, and different venues along their respective life paths. The specific details of the life are left to the individual to "fill in". This is not to say that each will not share some of the other's qualities, but that they will have a basic inclination toward their own style, or venue. The "inner movement which reaches out to its own" is the impetus for the active search carried on, consciously or unconsciously, by the individual to find support for his or her purpose, and to create a space in the world for his or her calling to be actualized. An individual who has attained an egoic awareness of his or her paradigms, and of his or her calling, can be a conscious participant, from an egoic standpoint, in an engaging way in the unfolding of his or her particular life purpose. When an individual lacks this egoic awareness there is often a sense of aimlessness, or a certain quality of haphazard wandering as the individual seeks purpose. Some may be "lucky" and reach fulfillment of their life purpose in a mostly unconscious way. But active engagement of the egoic understanding along the path of purpose, or calling, brings a certain harmony and beauty to the individual life which can be appreciated more readily along the path, on the way to fulfillment. Individuals who have recognized their life calling, at least in part, enjoy actively seeking out others on similar paths, and can more readily find areas of mutual nurturing and encouragement. Howard Gardner's work concerning creative paths of various scientists, artists, and others, points to the probable fact that even Einstein would not have been able to do his work effectively without the help and support of others. Even the support of one other person can make a crucial difference in the success of the fulfillment of an individual's purpose. Knowledge of the calling in conjunction with an understanding of the paradigms can bring a sense of awe and appreciation to the egoic understanding of the depth of self. Many of the whys and wherefores of life become self- explanatory. A person who was set up to become a musician can see what led him or her away from the early desire to be, say, a scientist. This is not to say that a life path is written in stone, but -15- that it takes special work of the Spirit to alter the proclivities of certain paradigms, or the tendencies toward a certain innate calling. As was stated before, the paradigms themselves are empty of detail, or, perhaps more accurately stated, are potentially able to work with an almost infinite variety of detail. The paradigm of aggression might contain acts of mercy, the paradigm of cynicism might contain attitudes of compassion. The particulars are provided through individual choice in conjunction with life circumstance. When an individual has a psychological problem of some sort, say with containing feelings of aggression, it could be quite helpful to know if the modal paradigm is in fact one of aggression. At this point one would be able to accept this aspect of one's soul-level make up, and explore ways in which the aggressive aspects could be used for the benefit of all concerned, rather than trying to eradicate the aggression itself. The question of psychological health then becomes one of how to harmonize within the given paradigm system, rather than how to wage a battle against naturally endowed tendencies. If one is looking to become more aggressive, but has this quality not accentuated in the paradigm system, one knows that it will take a certain kind of Spiritual work to develop this quality in oneself. All is possible qualitatively speaking, but it helps to know and understand the soul-level tools with which one is naturally comfortable, and which other tools must need to be developed. A calling may be postponed, avoided, intermittently missed. It may also possess you completely. Whatever, eventually it will out. It makes its claim. The daimon does not go away. Hillman, James Ibid p. 8 The essential question, one which can bring a whole world of color and absorption to the individual awareness, is, "Do I have a calling?". It is my belief that we all do have a calling, but it may be something which is quite difficult to express succinctly. However, the attempt to do so can open one to a world of unforeseen possibility and depth. For some, the calling seems to be provided by the world. The roles of provider, caretaker, parent, child, student, etc., all come with the life experience in a natural, sometimes unquestioned way. One may choose to become a "productive member of society", a philanthropist, or a despoiler. These types of "callings", part of the world order, are not what is in question here. Many individuals feel that, if they are part of this world order, then they have found their calling, and need not question any further. I am referring to something different. When I am fulfilling my assigned role in the world order am I completely fulfilled in my heart, in my mind, and in my Spirit? If the answer is an absolute "yes", one need question no further. But if there is still a lingering question, a question concerning what I was sent here to do, concerning the peace or -16- lack thereof when I am lying on my deathbed and reviewing my life and wondering what it was all about, then the question remains concerning my own fulfillment, my own sense of value and purpose. It is my conviction that both the role in the world order, and the sense of personal fulfillment must be taken into account to reach a state of personal clarity, and to achieve a sense of resolution concerning the life as a whole. Is it acceptable to have dreamed of being a musician, and to have never made the attempt to actually become one? I am not talking about success, I am talking about making the attempt within the limits of one's means. If I love to cook, and love to share the experience, how can I ever feel satisfied until I have shared this with others? If I love the work of Plato, will only reading Plato's works ever completely satisfy me? Wouldn't it be wonderful if, even for a time, I was able to actually feel alive in the world of pure ideas, and was able to see how intimately my daily world is connected to the more encompassing world of "higher thinking"? The next question is, "How do I discover my calling?" The answer can come directly from the intuition, or from a moment of inspiration. But there are other ways to discover the life purpose, ways that are more "down-to-earth", but which may take much more time, reflection, and effort. Aptitude tests can be valuable, but may not apply in areas where my true calling lies. Likes and dislikes can be helpful in this regard, but a word of caution, sometimes the things which we dislike on first exposure end up to be those things in which we can become intensely interested! The initial aversion itself can be a signal that we have been repressing our calling with our conscious mind, putting it on the shelf, avoiding it because it doesn't seem to fit in with the life that we consciously envision for ourselves. Sometimes the calling will encompass many fields of endeavor, many areas of involvement and interest, or it can be very focused, with the purpose of completing a very specific task. When I have discovered what I think to be my calling, how can I test this conclusion? The calling endures, it is not something that will go away, at least not for a significant amount of time. The more that it is repressed, the more it will try to surface in some other area. Or it will become its antithesis, a health problem, or a psychological nemesis. The calling is not something to cure or get over, any more than life itself is something to cure or get over. If one is hounded by one's calling it is an "inconvenience" which is not something to be escaped. Work, engagement, appreciation, love, these are the qualities which can nurture one's sense of calling. Without these things the calling will suffer inside of us, and we will suffer with it, because we and the calling are, in the deepest sense, one. Once I have heard my calling, what am I to do about it? Many people worry about this question because they think that they will have to quit their job, or marry someone else, or become a monk, etc.... Although some change in the life may be called for, it is extremely rare that a person is unable to attend to, at least in part, their calling, within the given life circumstance. Remember, the calling has been with us all of our lives, in a sense it is us, so it has never been far away. Most individuals only need to start paying attention to it in a caring manner, and then, in most cases, life starts to respond to the calling in surprising ways. We have all heard Joseph Campbell use the phrase "follow your bliss". This doesn't mean, in most circumstances, to do something rashly impulsive in order to prove -17- to the world how "in touch" we are with our feelings, or our immediate desires. It means simply follow, when the opportunity presents itself, the gentle leadership of the individual purpose, when it emerges, and allow the context to unfold in a natural, hopefully pleasant way. There may be some voluntary suffering involved. I f we want to play an instrument well we will need to practice. But the calling, like life itself, is not something which needs to be controlled every step of the way. It will find its way when the proper attention is paid to it. Examples of callings are as numerous as individuals on the planet. Some individuals will have very broad areas of application of the calling. One example might be, To bring ancient esoteric knowledge into a modern, directly applicable context. Another could be, To apply modern technologies in the furthering of the expansion of known truths. Yet another, To exemplify strength and courage so as to inspire others to seek this in themselves. Or, To bring about harmony in a diversified family situation. These are only possible examples, but the calling usually is set within a framework where there are numerous ways to bring about its realization. The vast majority of individuals are able to realize some aspect of their calling in whatever life circumstance they find themselves, barring the most extreme examples of disability, or say, incarceration. Even in extreme cases it is usually possible to realize some aspect of the calling. More will be said about the subject of calling in the following chapters. What we can glean, from the comments of the various authors cited in this section is that, through the ages, there has been an ongoing inquiry into basic principles of human psychology. It is my belief that the lack of any "profound" answers to this quest is due to categorical error. If we want to know the principles on which an organ of the body is based, we need to look at the entire body-as-a-unit, and the purpose of the entire unit, as encoded in its genes, along with the functioning within its environment. This is a multi-leveled study. Looking only at the specific organ will give us very limited answers. If we look only at the carburetor of a car, it will seem like a very curious thing. However, in the context of the car-as-a-whole, all the way from the metal, through the laws of physics, and all the way up to the purpose of the driver, the function of the carburetor becomes much less mysterious. If we look for psychological principles in a situation-specific context only, we run into the same mystery as is presented in the case of the abstracted carburetor. We are dealing with an isolated piece of machinery, apart from its broader context. The paradigms, along with the calling, provide the broader context in which the individual psychology functions. The individual psychology is seen from a multi-leveled perspective. What is lost in mystery and innocence is replaced with understanding and appreciation. The "profound principles" can now be explored.