Ken Wilber

(PAGE 2 OF 10)

Lines or Streams
Evidence suggests that through the developmental levels or waves of consciousness, move various developmental lines or streams (such as cognition, morals, affects, needs, sexuality, motivation, and self-identity [Gardner, 1983; Loevinger, 1976; Wilber, 1997a, 2000b]). It further appears that, in any given person, some of these lines can be highly developed, some poorly (or even pathologically) developed, and some not developed at all. Overall development, in short, is a very uneven affair!

The reason seems to be that the numerous developmental lines are to some degree independent modules, and these modules can and do develop in relatively independent ways (but not totally independently).^[5] Each of these modules probably evolved in response to a series of specific tasks (e.g., cognition of the external world, needs and desires in different environments, linguistic communication, sexual release mechanisms, and so on). There is an enormous amount of theory and research on modularity (both pro and con), although it is generally accepted in the psychological literature.^[6]

According to this body of research, a person can be at a relatively high level of development in some lines (such as cognition), medium in others (such as morals), and low in still others (such as spirituality). Thus, there is nothing linear about overall development. It is a wildly individual and idiosyncratic affair (even though many of the developmental lines themselves unfold sequentially).

The most common criticism of my model is that it is linear, a view I have not held for twenty years. But what about spirituality itself? Does it necessarily unfold in stages? My answer, again, is absolutely not. But before we see why, let's discuss states of consciousness.

States of Consciousness
Several states of consciousness are quite familiar. For example, waking, dreaming, and deep sleep. Those are some of the "normal" or "ordinary" states. Some of the "altered" or "nonordinary" states appear to include peak experiences, religious experiences, drug states, holotropic states, and meditative or contemplative states (Goleman, 1988; Grof, 1998; Tart 1972). Evidence strongly suggests that a person at virtually any stage or level of development can have an altered state or peak experience--including a spiritual experience (Wilber, 1983, 2000b). Thus, the idea that spiritual experiences are available only at the higher stages of development is incorrect. States themselves rarely show development, and their occurrence is often random; yet they seem to be some of the most profound experiences human beings ever encounter. Clearly, those important aspects of spirituality that involve altered states do not follow any sort of linear, sequential, or stage-like unfolding.

What types of higher states are there? Considerable cross-cultural comparisons (Forman, 1990, 1998a; Murphy, 1992; Smart, 1984; Smith, 1976; Walsh, 1999; Wilber, 2000b), taken as a whole, suggests that there are at least four higher or transpersonal states of consciousness, which I call psychic, subtle, causal, and nondual. (As we will see in a moment, when these temporary states become permanent traits, these transitory states are converted into permanent structures of consciousness, and I call those permanent structures, levels, or waves by the same four names.)

Briefly, the psychic state is a type of nature mysticism (where individuals report a phenomenological experience of being one with the entire natural-sensory world; e.g., Thoreau, Whitman. It is called "psychic," not because paranormal events occur--although evidence suggests that they sometimes do--but because it seems to be increasingly understood that what appeared to be a merely physical world is actually a psychophysical world, with conscious, psychic, or noetic capacities being an intrinsic part of the fabric of the universe, and this often results in an actual phenomenological experience of oneness with the natural world [Fox, 1990]). The subtle state is a type of deity mysticism (where individuals report an experience of being one with the source or ground of the sensory-natural world; e.g. St. Teresa of Avila, Hildegard of Bingen). The causal state is a type of formless mysticism (where individuals experience cessation, or immersion in unmanifest, formless consciousness; e.g., The Cloud of Unknowing, Patanjali, pseudo-Dionysus; see Forman, 1990). And the nondual is a type of integral mysticism (which is experienced as the union of the manifest and the unmanifest, or the union of Form and Emptiness; e.g., Lady Tsogyal, Sri Ramana Maharshi, Hui Neng [Forman, 1998b]).

As I have suggested in Integral Psychology (Wilber, 2000b), these apparently are all variations on the natural states of waking, dreaming, and deep sleep--which seems to be why a person at virtually any stage of development can experience any of these nonordinary states (because everybody, even an infant, wakes, dreams, and sleeps). However, in order for these temporary states to become permanent traits or structures, they must enter the stream of development (see below). Of course, for most people, the dream and deep sleep states are experienced as being less real than the waking state; but with prolonged meditative practice, it is said that these states can be entered with full awareness and an expansion of consciousness, whereupon they yield their higher secrets (Deutsche, 1969; Gyatso, 1986; Walsh, 1999).

In many of the wisdom traditions, the three great normal states (of waking, dreaming, and deep sleep) are said to correspond to the three great bodies or realms of being (gross, subtle, and causal). In both Vedanta and Vajrayana, for example, the bodies are said to be the energy support of the corresponding mind or state of consciousness (i.e., every mental mode has a bodily mode, thus preserving a bodymind union at all levels). The gross body is the body in which we experience the waking state; the subtle body is the body in which we experience the dream state (and also certain meditative states, such as savikalpa samadhi, and the bardo state, or the dream-like state which is said to exist in between rebirths); and the causal body is the body in which we experience the deep dreamless state (and nirvikalpa samadhi and the formless state)( Deutsche, 1969; Gyatso, 1986).

The point is that, according to these traditions, each state of consciousness has a corresponding body which is "made" of various types of gross, subtle, and very subtle energy (or "wind"), and these bodies or energies "support" the corresponding mind or consciousness states. In a sense, we can speak of the gross bodymind, the subtle bodymind, and the causal bodymind (using "mind" in the very broadest sense as "awareness" or "consciousness").^[7] The important point, which I will provisionally accept for this "master template," is simply that each state of consciousness is supported by a corresponding body, so that consciousness is never merely disembodied.^[8]

The Relation of Structures and States
One way of looking at the evidence thus far is to say, as a heuristic device, that states of consciousness (with their correlative bodies or realms) contain various structures of consciousness. For example, the waking state can contain the preoperational structure, the concrete operational structure, the formal operational structure, and so on. In Vedanta, these structures or levels of consciousness are known as the koshas (or sheaths).

For Vedanta, the three major bodies/states support five major structures. The subtle body, experienced in the dream state (and the bardo realm, savikalpa samadhi, etc.), is said to support three major koshas or consciousness structures--the pranamayakosha (élan vital), the manomayakosha (conventional mind), and the vijnanamayakosha (higher and illumined mind). The gross body/waking state supports the annamayakosha (the sheath made of food, or the physical mind), and the causal body/formless state supports the anandamayakosha (the sheath or consciousness structure made of bliss, or the transcendent mind).

The reason that both Vedanta and Vajrayana maintain this is that, for example, each night when you dream (when you are in the subtle body), you have access to at least three major structures (you can experience sexual élan vital [the pranamayakosha], mental images and symbols [manomayakosha], and higher or archetypal mind [vijnanamayakosha]--i.e., the dream state can contain all three of those levels/structures), but you do not experience the gross body, the sensorimotor realm, or the gross physical world--those are not directly present. In the dream you are phenomenologically existing in a subtle body experiencing the (three) consciousness structures supported by that subtle body and contained in that state.

In short, any given broad state of consciousness (such as waking or dreaming) can contain several different structures (or levels) of consciousness. These structures, levels, or waves, as earlier suggested, span the entire spectrum, and include many of those structure-stages that have been so extensively studied by western developmental psychologists, such as the structure-stages of moral, cognitive, and ego development (e.g., Cook-Greuter, 1990; Gilligan, 1990; Graves, 1970; Kegan, 1983; Kohlberg, 1981; Loevinger, 1976; Piaget, 1977; Wade, 1996). When, for example, Spiral Dynamics (a psychological model developed by Beck and Cowan [1996], based on the research of Clare Graves) speaks of the red meme, the blue meme, the orange meme, and so on, those are structures (levels) of consciousness.

Why are all these seemingly trivial distinctions important? One reason is that recognizing the difference between states of consciousness and structures of consciousness allows us to understand how a person at any structure or stage of development can nevertheless have a profound peak experience of higher and transpersonal states--for the simple reason that everybody wakes, dreams, and sleeps (and thus they have access to these higher states and realms of subtle and causal consciousness, no matter how "low" their general stage or level of development might be). However, the ways in which individuals experience and interpret these higher states and realms will depend largely on the level (or structure) of their own development. We will return to this important point in a moment.